PCcr^r,-, 


:^3C--ar:irii!*^^;£r^*?;": 


B]i®iE©ig  (gji]U:5t>r'5j'©sf 


THE 

HISTORY 


OP 


POLITICAL  PARTIES 


IN   THE 


STATE  OF  NEW-YORK, 


FROM    THE    RATIFCATION    OF    THE    FEDERAL 
CONSTITUTION   TO    DECEMBER,  1840. 


IIV  TWO  TOIiUinJBS. 

By  JABEZ  D.  HAMMOND,  L.  L.  D. 

d^ouAm,  (coition.,  ^ooWectco,  otto  GUtEoAaeo. 
TO    WHICH    IS    ADDED, 

NOTES  BY  GEN.  ROOT. 


VOL.  I. 


COOPERSTOWN : 
PUBLISHED    BY    H.   &   E.    PHINNEY. 

1847. 


JiSntered  according  to  an  Act  of  Congress  in  the  year  1842,  by  Jabbz  D. 
HiUHMOND,  in  the  Office  of  the  Clerk  of  the  Northern  District  of  New- York. 


LIBRARY 

XJNIVERSITY  OF  CALIPORNLfi 
SANTA  BARBARA 


POLITICAL  HISTORY 


OF 


NEW-YORK. 


CHAPTER    I. 

THE  STATE  OF  POLITICAL  PARTIES  IX  THE  STATE  OF  NEW-YORK, 

AT  THE  TIME  OF  THE  ADOPTION  OF  THE 

FEDERAL  CONSTITUTIOx\. 

During  the  contest  for  American  Independence,  the 
existence  of  political  parties,  according  to  the  present  no- 
tions we  entertain  of  those  associations,  may  be  said  to 
have  been  unknown  in  the  United  States.  There  were 
indeed  in  each  of  the  states,  a  few  families  who,  either 
from  motives  of  interest,  or  considerations  of  duty,  retain- 
ed their  attachment  to  the  British  Government;  and  per- 
haps the  state  of  New-York,  in  proportion  to  its  popula- 
tion, contained  a  greater  number  of  adherents  to  the  King 
of  England,  than  any  other  of  the  American  Colonies. 
This  was  probably  partly  if  not  entirely  owing  to  the  great 
number  of  offices  held  in  the  then  colony  of  New-York, 
under  the  Crown.  But  an  immense  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple, as  well  in  this  as  in  the  other  colonies,  at  an  early 
stage  of  the  controversy  with  the  mother  country,  resolved 
at  any  and  every  hazard,  to  resist  what  they  deemed  to  be 
the  unconstitutional  laws  enacted  by  the  Imperial  Parlia- 
ment. After  the  commencement  of  hostilities,  those  who 
supported  the  claims  of  Great   Britain,   and  who  were 

1 


2  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1783. 

called  tories,  were  regarded  by  the  great  mass  of  the 
people,  and  even  treated  by  the  temporary  governments 
which  were  organized,  rather  as  alien  enemies  than  citi- 
zens of  this  country.  A  decided  conviction  that  the  acts 
of  the  British  Government  were  an  encroachment  on  their 
rights  as  freemen,  a  fixed  and  settled  determination  to 
maintain  those  rights,  an  ardent  desire  to  establish  a  free 
government  independent  of  all  foreign  control,  and  a  sense 
of  common  danger,  constituted  a  strong  bond  of  union  of 
the  friends  of  American  liberty  and  independence  ; — and 
though  personal  jealousies,  avarice,  rivalship  and  ambition 
no  doubt  existed,  and  occasionally  produced  combinations 
of  individuals  and  consequently  cabals;  in  general  all  self- 
ish views,  pursuits  and  interests  were  absorbed  in  the  con- 
templation of  the  most  effectual  means  of  resistance  to 
unconstitutional  and  oppressive  laws,  a  resolution  to  de- 
fend the  principle  of  equal  rights,  and  a  determination  to 
establish  an  independent  goA'ernment. 

But  no  sooner  had  Great  Britain  acknowledged  the  in- 
dependence of  the  United  States,  and  the  treaty  of  peace 
of  1783  been  ratified,  than  men  began  to  speculate  on  and 
form  different  and  adverse  theories  respecting  the  form  of 
government  best  adapted  to  preserve  personal  liberty, 
promote  the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the  union  of  the 
States.  Leading  and  influential  individuals  also  began  to 
deliberate  upon  the  most  effectual  means  of  advancing  the 
separate  interests  of  the  states  of  which  they  respectively 
were  inhabitants,  and  it  is  probable  that  combinations 
having  in  view  the  gratification  of  individual  interests  and 
ambition,  were  early  formed  and  organized. 

It  required  little  reasoning  to  convince  all  intelligent 
men,  that  the  plan  of  government,  or  rather  union,  con- 
tained in  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  adopted  in  1777, 
was  not  competent  to  preserve  the  Union,  and  at  the  same 
time  regulate  the  commerce  of  the  American  nation,  and 


1783.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  3 

enable  it  to  discharge  its  debts,  defray  its  expenses  and  per- 
form its  engagements  with  other  nations.  The  old  Con- 
gress was,  by  these  articles,  little  other  than  a  meeting  of 
ambassadors  from  the  several  states  :  ambassadors  too,  who 
generally  speaking,  had  not  the  power  to  bind  their  princi- 
pals. They,  except  in  a  very  few  cases,  could  only  recom- 
mend the  adoption  of  such  measures  to  the  states  as,  in  their 
judgment,  the  public  welfare  demanded  ;  but  the  carrying 
into  effect  of  those  measures  depended  on  the  voluntary 
action  of  the  respective  state  legislatures  :  hence  it  was 
most  evident  that  some  scheme  of  general  government 
must  be  adopted,  which  would  enable  that  government, 
without  the  consent  of  all  the  states,  to  act  upon  the  per- 
sons of  the  citizens  of  each  state;  or  the  union  if  it  could 
be  preserved,  would,  for  all  important  national  purposes, 
be  quite  useless.  A  few  years'  experience  after  the  peace, 
proved  the  truth  of  this  position.  What  should  that  plan 
of  government  be,  which  should  remedy  the  evils  already 
experienced,  and  guard  effectually  against  those  which 
were  anticipated  1  Thinking  and  reflecting  men  in  every 
part  of  the  nation  turned  their  attention  with  anxious  soli- 
citude to  this  interesting  and  important  question.  All 
admitted  the  imperfections  and  inadequacy  of  the  Articles 
of  Confederation  :  all  admitted  that  a  new  plan  of  govern- 
ment or  constitution  ought  to  be  devised  and  adopted, 
but  they  differed  widely  in  relation  to  the  principles  which 
that  constitution  ought  to  contain,  and  the  magnitude  and 
nature  of  powers  which  should  be  granted  to  the  gene- 
ral government. 

It  was  this  difference  of  opinion  which  produced  the 
first  organized  political  parties  in  this  state  and  nation. 
Here,  therefore,  the  task  I  have  undertaken  commences. 
But  I  do  not  propose  to  enter  minutely  into  a  detail  of 
the  movements  of  the  leaders  of  the  two  parties  to  this 
contToversy.     It  is  to  a    later    period    which  the  atten- 


4  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1783. 

tion  of  the  reader  is  more  particularly  invited,  and  in 
which  I  shall  endeavor  to  delineate  more  in  detail  the 
character,  and  develop  more  fully  the  motives  of  the 
actors  in  the  political  drama,  and  the  causes  which  im- 
pelled them  to  action.     [See  Note  J.] 

In  no  state  in  the  union  was  the  constitution  which 
was  recommended  by  the  National  Convention,  more  se- 
verely criticised  and  more  zealously  opposed,  and  in  none 
was  it  more  ardently  and  ably  defended  than  in  the  state 
of  New-York.  Indeed,  this  state  may  be  said  to  have 
furnished  the  principal  author,  and  afterwards  the  cham- 
pion for  the  defence  of  that  instrument.  It  is  almost  un- 
necessary to  say  that  I  allude  to  General  Alexander 
Hamilton.  With  him  were  associated  John  Jay,  whose 
revolutionary  services  in  the  civil  department,  great  legal 
learning,  sound  discriminating  mind,  high  moral  qualities, 
and  unblemished  purity  of  character,  gave  him  a  power- 
ful influence  with  the  public ;  Robert  R.  Livingston,  a 
man  of  fine  address,  possessing  a  great  landed  interest  in 
the  central  counties  on  the  Hudson's  river,  standing  at  the 
head  of  a  powerful  and  influential  family,  and  holding  the 
highest  judicial  office  in  the  state,  and  Gen.  Schuyler  of 
Albany,  together  with  the  Van  Rensselaer  family,  possess- 
ing, deservedly,  great  influence  with  the  people  inhabiting 
the  section  of  the  state,  where  they  resided,  with  many 
others  eminent  for  their  talents  and  standing  in  the  com- 
munity. 

In  the  front  ranks  of  the  other  party  stood  George 
Clinton,  who  probably  had  a  stronger  hold  on  the  aff*ec- 
tions  of  the  people,  than  any  other  citizen  of  the  state. 
He  may  be  said  to  have  been  the  manufacturer  of  his  own 
fortune.  His  father  was  an  emigrant  from  Ireland,  and  at 
an  early  period  settled  in  Little  Britain,  in  the  county  of 
Orange.  Although  not  highly  distinguished  either  for 
wealth  or  talents,  he  was  much  respected  for  his  patriotism 


1783.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  5 

and  private  virtues.  He  officiated  as  a  county  judge,  and 
during  the  French  war  was  a  colonel  in  the  British  army 
which  invaded  Canada.  The  property  which  he  brought 
with  him  from  Ireland,  and  that  which,  by  his  industry 
and  economy,  he  accumulated  in  this  country,  enabled  him 
to  bring  up  his  family  well,  but  not  to  leave  them  rich. 
George  was  his  youngest  son,  and  was  bred  a  lawyer. 
Shortly  after  he  completed  his  studies,  he  was  appointed 
by  Sir  George  Clinton,  the  Colonial  Governor,  to  whom 
the  Clinton  family  are  said  to  have  been  distantly  related, 
clerk  of  the  county  of  Ulster. 

Mr.  George  Clinton  was  one  of  the  earliest  friends  of 
the  American  cause,  and  was  in  grain  and  in  principle  a 
republican.  He  possessed  a  clear  and  logical  mind,  and 
great  decision  of  character.  His  talents  and  private 
merit  soon  rendered  him  conspicuous  among  the  patriots 
of  that  day,  and  be  was  almost  unanimously  elected  the 
first  Governor  of  the  state  of  New-York.  This  election 
is  the  more  honorable  to  him,  when  it  is  considered  that 
there  were  at  that  time  in  the  state,  several  distinguished 
friends  to  American  Independence,  who  were  men  of 
great  wealth  and  powerful  family  connections ;  and  that 
Mr.  Clinton  was  elected  without  any  of  these  adventitious 
aids.  At  the  time  when  the  controversy  in  relation  to  the 
adoption  of  the  new  constitution  commenced,  Gov.  Clin- 
ton had  been  repeatedly  elected  by  the  people  to  the  first 
office  in  the  state  j  he  had  stood  at  the  helm  and  dis- 
charged his  duty  ably  and  faithfully  during  the  long  and, 
perilous  revolutionary  struggle,  with  the  fortitude  of  a 
hero,  and  the  zeal  and  devotedness  of  a  patriot ;  and 
clothed  as  he  was,  by  the  constitution  of  the  state,  with 
the  power  of  distributing  the  patronage  of  the  govern- 
ment, it  cannot  fail  to  be  perceived  that  such  a  man  must 
have  been  capable  of  producing  a  very  great  impression 
upon  the  public  mind.     Among  the  most  distinguished 


6  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1783. 

individuals  who  united  with  him  in  his  opposition  to  the 
adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  were  Robert  Yates, 
afterwards  for  a  long  time  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  John  Lansing  a  delegate  from  this  state  in  the 
convention  that  formed  the  constitution,  and  subsequently 
Chief  Justice  and  CTiancellor  ;  and,  though  last  named, 
by  no  means  the  least,  Mr.  Melancton  Smith. 

To  exhibit  the  manner  in  which  some  of  the  points  in 
controversy  arose  between  the  two  parties,  it  is  proper  to 
state,  that  in  pursuance  of  a  recommendation  of  commis- 
sioners from  several  states  who  had  met  at  Annapolis  in 
Maryland,  of  whom  Gen.  Hamilton  was  one,  in  Septem- 
ber, 1786,  "  to  take  into  consideration  the  trade  and  com- 
merce of  the  United  States,  and  to  consider  how  far  an 
uniform  system  in  their  commercial  intercourse  and  regu- 
lations might  be  necessary  to  the  common  interest  and 
permanent  happiness"  of  all  the  States,  Congress,  in  Feb- 
ruary, 1787,  resolved  that  it  was  expedient  that  on  the 
second  IMonday  in  May,  then  next,  a  convention  of  dele- 
gates who  should  have  been  appointed  by  the  several 
states,  should  be  held  at  Philadelphia  for  the  sole  and  ex- 
press purpose  of  revising  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  and 
reporting  to  Congress  and  the  several  legislatures,  such 
alterations  and  provisions  therein  as  should,  when  agreed 
to  in  Congress,  and  confirmed  by  the  states,  under  the 
Federal  Constitution,  be  adequate  to  the  exigencies  of  go- 
vernment, and  the  preservation  of  the  Union. 

The  views  of  the  politicians  of  the  state  of  New-York, 
on  the  questions  involved  in  this  recommendation,  were 
fully  developed  in  the  debates  and  proceedings  which 
took  place  in  the  legislature  which  convened  in  the  city 
of  New-York,  in  the  winter  of  1787.  But  in  order  pro- 
perly to  understand  them,  it  is  necessary  to  state  that  in 
1781,  in  pursuance  of  the  recommendation  of  Congress, 
an  act  was  passed  which  granted  to  the  United  States  the 


1783.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  7 

import  duties  to  be  collected  in  the  port  of  New-York, 
and  provided  that  those  duties  should  be  levied  and  collect- 
ed in  such  manner  and  form,  and  under  such  penalties  and 
regulations^  and  by  such  officers  as  Congress  should,  from 
time  to  time  make,  order  and  appoint.  But  in  March, 
1783,  {after  the  peace,)  this  act  was  repealed  and  an  act 
was  passed  again,  granting  the  duties  to  the  United  States, 
but  directing  their  collection  by  officers  who  should  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  state.  This  law  was  afterwards  modified 
at  the  request  of  Congress,  so  as  to  render  the  collectors 
amenable  to  and  removable  by  the  authorities  of  the  Uni- 
ted States.  In  reference  to  this  proceeding,  Gen.  Schuy- 
ler, on  the  4th  May,  1783,  wrote  to  Gen.  Hamilton,  "Al- 
though our  legislature  seems  still  inclined  to  confer  pow- 
ers on  Congress  adequate  to  the  proper  discharge  of  the 
great  duties  of  the  sovereign  council  of  these  states,  yet 
I  perceive  with  pain  that  some,  chagrined  at  disappoint- 
ment, are  already  attempting  to  inculcate  a  contrary  prin- 
ciple, and  I  fear  it  will  gain  too  deep  a  root  to  be  eradi- 
cated, until  such  confusion  prevails  as  will  make  men 
deeply  feel  the  necessity  of  not  retaining  so  much  sover- 
eignty inthe  states  individually." 

Mr.  J.  C.  Hamilton,  in  the  life  of  Gen.  Hamilton,  vol. 
2,  p.  387,  remarks,  that "  early  in  the  year  seventeen  hun- 
dred and  eighty-four,  a  motion  was  made  in  the  legisla- 
ture of  New-York,  urging  the  abolition  of  the  offices  of 
superintendent  of  finance  and  of  continental  receiver,  which 
was  followed  by  the  acts  establishing  a  custom  house  and 
a  revenue  system. 

*^  The  immense  and  improvident  speculations  made  on 
the  return  of  peace,  poured  into  the  coffers  of  that  state 
a  large  revenue.  This  was  subsequently  increased  by  the 
navigation  acts  of  other  states,  which  rendered  New-York 
the  entrepot  of  the  whole  region  east  of  the  Delaware, 
and  presented  to  her  tempting  prospects  of  future  wealth. 


8  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1783. 

"  To  whatever  cause  it  may  be  attributed,  it  became  the 
settled  policy  of  New-York  to  defeat  the  proposition  for 
a  national  revenue.  A  measure  conforming  with  the  re- 
commendation of  Congress  was  proposed  in  the  legisla- 
ture in  seventeen  hundred  and  eighty-four,  and  failed.  It 
was  again  brought  forward  in  seventeen  hundred  and 
eighty-five,  and  again  failed  by  two  votes  in  the  senate. 

"  At  the  close  of  the  session  of  seventeen  hundred  and 
eighty-six,  in  which  the  exertions  of  Schuyler  to  induce 
the  grant  were  most  conspicuous,  a  law  was  enacted  giv- 
ing the  revenue  to  Congress,  but  reserving  to  the  state 
*  the  sole  power  of  levying  and  collecting'  the  duties ; 
the  conferring  of  which  power  on  Congress,  was  an  indis- 
pensable and  express  condition  of  the  acts  of  some  of 
the  other  states.  Instead  of  making  the  collectors  ame- 
nable and  removable  by  Congress,  it  subjected  them  to 
the  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  the  state  courts. 

"It  also  rendered  the  duties  payable  in  the  bills  of 
credit  of  the  state,  and  thus  so  entirely  contravened  the 
plan  of  seventeen  hundred  and  eighty-three,  as  to  be 
equivalent  to  its  rejection.  This  enactment  was  defended 
by  the  argument  that  Congress,  being  a  single  body,  and 
consequently  without  checks,  would  be  apt  to  misapply 
the  money  arising  from  it." 

Mr.  Hamilton  then  proceeds  to  remark,  that  Congress 
"  perceiving  that  no  benefit  could  be  derived  from  the  law 
recently  passed  by  this  state  j  that  if  acceded  to,  the  acts 
of  twelve  adopting  states  (for  Rhode  Island  had  mean- 
while concurred)  would,  by  their  conditions,  which  requi- 
red the  concurrence  of  all  the  states,  become  void ;  that 
the  provision  which  rendered  the  duties  payable  in  bills 
of  credit  was  most  pernicious,  as  it  would,  on  the  same 
principle,  admit  of  all  the  paper  money  of  the  other  States 
at  various  rates  of  depreciation,  thus  reducing  the  revenue, 
producing  an  inequality  in  the  public  burdens,  and  deter- 


♦ 


1786.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  9 

ring  the  states  averse  from  paper  money  from  engaging 
in  the  measure — Congress  treated  it  as  a  nullity." 

Mr.  H.  adds  that  they  thereupon  "  passed  a  resolution 
requesting  Governor  Clinton  to  convene  the  legislature 
for  the  purpose  of  submitting  this  subject  again  to  its 
consideration.  To  this  application,  involving  such  mo- 
mentous consequences,  Clinton  replied  by  letter,  stating 
that  ^  he  entertained  the  highest  deference  and  respect 
for  the  authority  of  Congress,  and  that  it  would  afford 
him  the  greatest  pleasure  to  have  it  in  his  power  to  com- 
ply with  their  recommendations,  but  that  he  had  not  the 
power  to  convene  the  legislature  before  the  time  fixed  by 
law  for  their  stated  meeting,  except  upon  ^  extraordinary 
occasions j^  and  as  the  present  business  had  already  been 
particularly  laid  before  them,  and  so  recently  as  at  their  last 
session  received  their  determination,  it  cannot  come  within 
that  description.'  " 

The  Governor,  in  his  speech  to  the  legislature  at  the 
opening  of  the  session  of  which  I  am  speaking,  gave  a 
statement  of  this  application  which  Congress  had  made  to 
him  to  call  an  extra  meeting  of  that  bodyj  and  his  reasons 
for  refusing  to  comply  with  the  request,  being  the  same  as 
that  which  he  had  assigned  in  his  reply  to  Congress,  name- 
ly, that  inasmuch  as  the  legislature  had  but  a  few  months 
before  deliberated  upon  and  solemnly  decided  that  very 
question,  he  could  not  consider  the  recommendation  of 
Congress  a  circumstance  which  created  that  extraordinary 
occasion  contemplated  by  the  constitution  which  alone  au- 
thorized him  to  require  a  meeting  of  the  legislature. 

On  the  legislature  which  was  now  in  session,  was  de- 
volved the  duly  of  deciding  whether  this  state  would  send 
delegates  to  the  National  Convention  which  was  to  as- 
semble in  May  following  j  and  if  they  should  decide  that 
question  in  the  affirmative,  then  it  would  become  their 
duty  to  select  and  appoint  the  delegates.     For  this  reason 


10  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1786. 

the  friends  of  a  national  government  early  saw  the  neces- 
sity that  General  Hamilton  should  be  one  of  the  members 
of  the  State  legislature,  and  take  a  part  in  the  discussion 
of  these  important  and  interesting  questions.  To  effect 
this  very  desirable  object,  the  most  strenuous  efforts  were 
made  at  the  April  election  to  elect  him  a  member  from 
the  city  of  New-York,  and  by  the  vigorous  exertions  of 
the  merchants  of  that  city,  aided  by  his  political  friends, 
he  was  chosen. 

Gen.  Schuyler,  the  father-in-law  of  Gen.  H.,  also  a 
zealous  friend  of  the  establishment  of  an  energetic  nation- 
al government,  was  at  that  time  a  member  of  the  Senate. 
The  national  politics  of  these  gentlemen,  both  eminent 
for  their  talents  and  public  services,  placed  them  in  a  po- 
sition adverse  to  Gov.  Clinton,  and  around  them  the  op- 
position in  each  house  rallied.  Mr.  Hamilton  had  been 
placed  at  the  head  of  the  committee  to  draw  an  answer 
to  the  Governor's  speech,  and  he  drew  one  which  was 
silent  in  respect  to  that  part  of  it  which  stated  his  refusal  to 
call  an  extra  session  of  the  legislature  at  the  request  of 
Congress.  The  friends  of  the  governor,  the  leading  and 
strong  man  among  whom  was  Samuel  Jones,  a  very  learned 
and  able  lawyer,  afterwards  Comptroller,  and  the  father  of 
the  late  Chancellor  Jones,  offered  an  amendment  to  the  an- 
swer, as  reported  by  Mr.  Hamilton,  approving  of  the  con- 
duct of  the  governor  in  refusing  to  convene  the  legislature 
upon  the  occasion  to  which  I  have  referred.  On  the  ques- 
tion of  adopting  this  amendment,  an  interesting  debate 
ensued,  conducted  principally  by  Mr.  Hamilton  and  Mr. 
Jones.  The  point  in  controversy,  was  whether  the  occa- 
sion of  the  proposed  call  was  such  an  extraordinary  one 
as,  by  the  constitution,  authorized  and  required  the  go- 
vernor to  make  such  call ;  but  in  the  progress  of  the  dis- 
cussion, the  claims  of  the  confederated  States  on  this 
state,  and  the  relations  which  it  had  and  ought  to  have 


1787.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  11 

with  the  confederacy,  were  considered.  This  opened  a 
wide  field  of  debate,  which  was  conducted  with  great 
ability  and  some  asperity,  on  both  sides.  On  the  ques 
tion  being  taken,  the  amendment  was  adopted  by  a  vote 
of  36  to  9.  If  this  vote  is  to  be  considered  as  a  test  vote 
of  the  strength  of  parties  on  the  question,  whether  any 
material  alterations  ought  to  be  made  in  the  Articles  of 
Confederation — and  it  probably  is — it  is  obvious  that  the 
anti-federalists  at  that  time  held  a  powerful  preponderance 
in  the  popular  branch  of  the  legislature.  In  the  senate, 
too,  there  was  a  large  majority  who  concurred  with  the 
governor.  The  legislature  decided  in  favor  of  sending 
delegates  to  the  National  Convention,  and  appointed  three 
delegates.  The  political  principles  of  the  two  houses 
accounts  for  the  reason  why  a  majority  of  the  delegates, 
(Mr.  Yates  and  Mr.  Lansing)  were  opposed  to  any  mate- 
rial alteration  in  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  or  rather 
to  the  formation  of  a  new  goverjiment^  while  the  election 
of  Gen.  Hamilton  by  the  same  bodies  of  men,  so  large  a 
proportion  of  whom  accorded  with  the  views  of  Gov. 
Clinton,  affords  a  demonstration  of  the  liberality  with 
which  the  partizans  of  that  day  conducted  towards  each 
other.  So  far  from  making  a  war  of  extermination  on 
their  opponents,  or  treating  them  as  enemies  to  the  coun- 
try, the  majority  of  the  legislature  of  1787  were  willing 
and  desirous  that  the  views  and  wishes  of  the  minority 
should  be  represented  in  the  grand  National  Conven- 
tion about  to  be  held  ;  and  therefore  elected  General 
Hamilton,  their  most  able,  zealous  and  ultra  opponent,  as 
one  of  the  delegates. 

By  a  reference  to  the  resolution  authorizing  the  appoint- 
ment of  delegates  to  the  National  Convention,  it  will  be 
seen  with  what  extreme  caution  and  jealousy  of  their 
rights  as  an  independent  sovereignty,  the  New-York  le- 
gislature consented  to  become  a  party  to  that  convention. 


12  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1787. 

The  resolution  declared  that  the  delegates  were  appointed, 
"  for  the  sole  and  express  purpose  of  revising  the  Articles 
of  Confederation,  and  reporting  to  Congress  and  the  seve- 
ral legislatures  such  alterations  and  amendments  therein, 
as  shall,  when  agreed  to  in  Congress,  and  confirmed  by 
the  several  states  under  the  Federal  Constitution  be  ade- 
quate to  the  exigencies  of  the  government,  and  preserva- 
tion the  union." 

The  National  Convention  assembled  at  Philadelphia,  at 
the  time  appointed  by  Congress. 

In  reviewing  the  proceedings  of  that  distinguished  as- 
semblage of  men,  it  will  be  found  that  they  were  divided 
into  three  classes. 

One  portion  of  them  desired  to  confine  the  convention 
to  an  enlargement  of  the  powers  of  the  then  existing  Con- 
federacy, or  rather  to  an  amendment  of  the  Articles  of  Con- 
federation. To  this  object  the  delegates  from  New-York 
were,  by  the  above  resolution,  in  the  opinion  of  Messrs. 
Yates  and  Lansing,  restricted  j  accordingly  these  gentle- 
men, after  a  majority  of  the  convention  had  determined 
to  propose  a  constitution  which,  instead  of  amending 
would  abolish  the  articles  of  the  confederacy,  withdrew 
from  it,  though  in  the  midst  of  its  most  active  operations; 
but  Mr.  Hamilton  elected  to  remain  on  his  own  responsi- 
bility, and  take  a  part  in  the  deliberations  of  that  body. 
The  delegates  from  New-Jersey  and  Delaware,  and  the 
celebrated  Luther  Martin  of  Maryland,  entertained  views 
similar  to  those  of  Mr.  Yates  and  Mr.  Lansing  in  respect 
to  the  proper  business  and  duty  of  the  convention.  The 
opinion  of  these  gentlemen  may  be  inferred  from  the  re- 
solutions proposed  by  Mr.  Patterson  from  New  Jersey. 
(See  Pitkin's  U.  S.  History,  229.) 

The  only  material  alteration  in  the  Articles  of  Confede- 
ration proposed  by  these  resolutions,  seems  to  be  the  crea- 
tion of  an  executive  department  to  consist  of  one  or  more 


1787.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  13 

individuals  who  were  to  possess  very  little  power,  except 
that  of  appointing  certain  officers  and  directing  military 
operations,  the  creation  of  a  judiciary,  or  rather  a  court 
of  admiralty,  and  a  declaration  that  the  constitutional 
acts  of  Congress  and  all  treaties  should  be  the  supreme 
law  of  the  states.  The  resolution  further  proposed  "  that 
if  any  state,  or  body  of  men  in  any  state,  should  oppose  or 
prevent  the  carrying  into  effect  such  acts,  or  treatres,  the 
federal  executive  should  be  authorized  to  call  forth  the 
powers  of  the  confederated  states  sufficient  to  compel 
obedience  to  such  acts,  or  enforce  an  observance  of  such 
treaties." 

The  antipodes  to  this  project  were  headed  in  the  con- 
vention by  Gen.  Hamilton,  whose  desire  was  to  create  a 
strong  government,  purely  national.  Mr.  Hamilton's  plan 
was  that  the  members  of  the  house  of  representatives 
should  be  chosen  for  three  years  ;  that  the  states  should 
be  divided  into  districts  for  the  purpose  of  an  election  by 
the  peophy  of  electors  who  should  elect  the  senators;  that 
the  people  of  the  same  districts  should  choose  electors 
who  were  to  elect  electors  of  president — the  senators  and 
president  to  hold  their  offices  during  good  behaviour  ;  the 
president  to  have  a  negative  on  all  bills  which  might  pass 
both  branches  of  the  legislature;  to  have  the  power,  with 
the  advice  of  the  senate,  to  make  treaties,  to  have  the 
sole  appointment  of  the  heads  of  departments,  and  the 
appointment  of  all  other  offices  by  consent  of  the  senate. 
His  plan  of  a  judiciary  establishment,  was  in  substance, 
the  same  as  that  which  was  finally  adopted;  he  proposed 
that  all  impeachments  should  be  tried  by  a  court  to  con- 
sist of  the  chief  or  senior  judge  of  the  superior  courts  of 
law  in  each  state,  provided  such  judge  held  his  office  du- 
ring good  behaviour,  and  had  a  permanent  salary,  and 
that  the  laws  of  the  states,  contrary  to  the  constitution 
and  laws  of  the  United  States  should  be  utterly  void. 


14  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1787. 

But  thfe  most  important  innovation  upon  the  sovereignty  of 
the  states  proposed  by  Gen.  Hamilton  was,  that  the  go- 
vernors of  the  states  should  be  appointed  by  the  pre- 
sident and  senate,  and  that  they  should  have  an  unquali- 
fied veto  on  all  the  laws  which  might  be  attempted  to  be 
passed  by  the  state  legislatures  of  which  they  respectively 
were  governors.* 

*  Gea  Hamilton,  it  would  seem,  afterwards  changed  his  opinion  as  to  the  pro 
priely  of  a  constitutional  provision  that  the  President  should  hold  his  office  du- 
ring goord  behaviour;  or  rather  subsequent  reflection  convinced  him  that  the  de- 
mocratic propensities  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  were  so  strong  that  poli- 
cy required  that  an  experiment  should  be  made  of  electing  a  President  periodical- 
ly. In  the  subjoined  letter,  which  he  wrote  to  Col.  Timothy  Pickering  more  than 
eleven  years  afterwards,  he  states  the  views  he  adopted  before  the  adjournment 
of  the  convention.  From  the  whole  tenor  of  this  letter  as.  well  as  from  other 
acts  and  declarations  of  his,  which  I  may  hereafter  have  occasion  to  notice,  it  is 
evident  that  so  late  as  the  year  1603,  which  it  will  be  remembered  was  shortly  be- 
fore his  death,  he  had  very  little  faith  in  the  position  that  the  people  of  the  United 
States  were  capable  of  sustaining  a  democra,tic  or  even  a  republican  representa- 
tive government.  He  thought,  however,  "it  was  in  itself  right  and  proper  that 
the  republican  theory  should  have  a  fair  and  full  trial;"  and  with  this  view  he  re- 
luctantly consented  that  the  national  executive  should  be  periodically  elected, 
and  ultimately  to  other  innovations  that  the  majority  of  the  convention, made  up- 
on his  scheme.  But  I  will  give  his  letter  to  Mr.  Pickering,  which,  it  appears,  was 
written  for  the  purpose  of  allaying  the  prejudices  which  were  rife  against  him  ia 
consequence  of  his  aristocratic  principles.  In  my  judgment  it  is  calculated  to 
produce  a  different  and  contrary  effect. 

"  Nrw-YoRR,  Sept.  16,  1803. 

"  My  Dear  Sir — I  will  make  no  apology  for  my  delay  in  answering  your  inquiry 
some  time  since  made,  because  I  could  offer  none  that  would  satisfy  myself.  I 
pray  you  only  to  believe  that  it  proceeded  from  any  thing  rather  than  want  of  re- 
spect or  regard.     I  shall  now  comply  with  your  request. 

"The  highest  toned  propositions,  which  I  made  in  the  convention,  were  for  a 
president,  senate,  and  judges  during  good  behaviour — a  house  of  representatives 
for  three  years.  Though  I  would  have  enlarged  the  legislative  power  of  the  gene- 
eral  government,  yet  1  never  contemplated  the  abolition  of  the  state  governments; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  they  were,  in  some  particulars,  constituent  parts  of  my 
plan. 

"This  plan  was  in  my  conception  conformable  with  the  strict  theory  of  a  go- 
vernment purely  republican  ;  the  essential  criteria  of  which  are,  that  the  princi- 
pal organs  of  the  executive  and  legislative  departments  be  elected  by  the  people, 
and  hold  their  offices  by  a  responsible  and  temporary  or  defeasible  tenure. 

''A  vote  was  taken  on  the  proposition  respecting  the  executive.  Five  states 
were  in  favor  of  it;  among  these  Virginia;  and  though  from  the  manner  of  voting, 
by  delegations,  individuals  were  not  distinguished,  it  was  morally  certain,  from 
the  known  situation  of  the  Virginia  members,  (six  in  number,  two  of  them,  Ma- 
son and  Randolph,  professing  popular  doctrines,)  that  IMadison  must  have  concur- 
red in  the  vote  of  Virginia.  Thus,  if  I  sinned  against  republicanism,  Mr.  Madison 
was  not  less  guilty. 


1787.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  15 

Between  these  two  ultra  classes,  the  one  advocating  a 
strong  aristocratic  national  government ;  and  the  other 
democratic  governments,  by  the  respective  states,  united 
by  articles  of  confederation,  varying  in  substance  very 
little  from  a  treaty  of  alliance,ofFensive  and  defensive,  be- 
tween independent  nations,  a  third  party  was  formed  in 
the  convention,  which  proposed  the  formation  of  a  go- 
vernment partly  national  and  partly  federal  j  a  govern- 
ment elective  and  representative  in  its  character,  but  which 
should  represent  the  people  in  their  numerical  strength,  and 
the  states  in  their  sovereign  capacity.  The  people  of  the 
union  were  to  be  represented  in  ore  branch  of  the  le- 
gislature and  the  states  in  the  other;  while  the  national 
executive  was  to  be  created  partly  by  the  people  and 
partly  by  the  states.  This  scheme  was  substantially 
sketched  in  a  series  of  resolutions  offered  by  Mr.  Ran- 
'  dolph  of  Virginia,  and  probably  mainly  drawn  by  Mr.  Ma- 
dison, and  from  thence  called  "  the  Virginia  plan.^^  (2 
Pit.  226.  2  Ham.)  A  sufficient  number  of  the  ultras  on 
each  side  yielded  to  this  middle  course  to  constitute  a  ma- 
jority of  the  convention  ;  and  hence  our  present  constitu- 
tion, exclusive  of  the  amendments  subsequently  proposed 
and  made  a  part  of  it,  was  reported  by  the  convention, 
and  recommended  by  that  body  to  be  adopted  by  the  states. 

But  the  recommendation  of  the  convention  produced 
little  effect  on  the  opponents  of  their  plan  of  government 
in  the  state  of  New- York. 

One  ground  upon  which  the  anti-federalists,    (for  so 


"  I  may  truly  then  say,  that  I  never  proposed  either  a  president  or  senate  for 
life  ;  and  that  I  neither  recommended  nor  meditated  the  annihilation  of  the  state 
governments. 

"And  I  may  add,  that  in  the  course  of  the  discussions  in  the  convention,  neither 
the  propositions  thrown  out  for  debate,  nor  even  those  voted  in  the  earlier  sta- 
ges of  deliberation,  were  considered  as  evidences  of  a  definitive  opinion  in  the 
proposer  or  voter.  It  appeared  to  me  to  be  in  some  sort  understood,  that  with  a 
view  to  free  investigation,  experimental  propositions  might  be  made;  vrh-cb  wcro 
to  be  received  merely  as  suggestions  for  consideratioa 


16  POLITICAL    HISTORY  *"■    [1787. 

the  opponents  of  the  constitution  were  denominated)  -who 
were  citizens  of  the  large  states,  founded  their  opposition, 
was  that  the  new  constitution  sacrificed  too  much  to  the 
small  states.  A  moment's  reflection  will  shew  that  there 
was  much  that  was  plausible,  and  indeed  substantial  in 
this  objection.  The  new  constitution  proposed  a  volun- 
tary surrender  of  political  power  by  one  class  of  men  to 
another.  To  form  a  correct  notion  of  the  sacrifice  on  the 
part  of  the  great  states,  it  is  only  necessary  to  consider 
the  matter  in  the  light  in  which  the  question  would  be 
viewed, if  it  were  an  original  one,  and  now  for  the  first  time 
presented  to  us.  I  will  suppose  the  state  of  Delaware  to 
contain  sixty  thousand  inhabitants,  and  that  the  state  of 
New-York  contains  two  millions.  The  United  States  se- 
nate is  a  co-ordinate  branch  of  the  law  making  power. 
Besides  posessing  equal,  or  all  but  equal  power  in  the  en- 
actment of  laws  with  the  house  of  representatives,  it 
is  a  controlling  branch  of  the  treaty  making  power,  (and 
treaties  are,  by  the  fiat  of  the  constitution,  made  the  su- 
preme law  of  the  land)  and  it  is  an  important  branch  of 
the  appointing  power,  holding  an  unconditional  veto  on 
the  distribution  of  all  the  patronage  of  the  national  go- 
vernment. Now  suppose  Delaware  were  to  request  New- 
York  to  give  her  as  much  power  in  this  department  of  the 
national  legislature,  or  which  would  be  the  same  in  sub- 
stance, should  ask  that  one  citizen  of  Delaware  should 
possess  as  much  power  in  the  U.  S.  senate  as  thirty-three 
citizens  of  the  state  of  New-York  %  It  strikes  me  that 
such  a  proposition,  if  it  were  now  for  the  first  time  made, 
would  not  be  very  favorably  entertained  here.  If  such  a 
proposal  should  not  be  regarded  as  a  project  to  create  a 
rotten  borough  system,  I  am  quite  sure  it  would  be  con- 
sidered as  very  much  like  it.  The  manner  in  which  this 
objection  was  answered,  is  too  obvious  and  too  well 
known  to  render  it  necessary  tc  lepeat  it.     But  the  great 


# 


1787.]  or  NEW-YORK.  17 

and  absorbing  ground  of  opposition,  was  that  the  propo- 
sed constitution  entirely  departed  from  the  principles  of  a 
confederacy,  and  constituted,  as  was  contended,  a  conso- 
lidated national  government  vested  with  extensive  powers, 
operating  not  upon  the  states  but  upon  individuals;  that  it 
divested  the  states  of  their  sovereignty;  that  it  clothed  the 
President  with  so  much  power  and  patronage,  as  in  the 
hands  of  an  unprincipled  ambitious  man  would  enable 
him  to  subvert  the  liberties  of  the  people  and  usurp 
to  himself  despotic  power  ;  and  that  the  people  them- 
selves were  not  secured  against  the  gradual  encroachment 
upon  their  rights,  by  the  legislative,  judicial  and  execu- 
tive departments  of  the  national  government,  by  a  bill 
of  rights.  "  Should  the  system,"  said  the  ardent  and  elo- 
quent Patrick  Henry,  "  go  into  operation,  what  will  the 
states  have  to  do  1  To  take  care  of  the  poor,  repair  and 
make  highways,  erect  bridges,  and  so  on^  and  so  on.  Abo- 
lish the  state  legislatures  at  once.  For  what  purpose 
should  they  be  retained  f     2  Pit.  273. 

Gov.  Clinton  and  his  friends  tenaciously  adhered  to 
the  principles  contained  in  the  resolution  of  the  New- 
York  legislature  for  the  appointment  of  delegates  to  the 
national  convention.  That  resolution,  they  contended, 
confined  the  action  of  the  delegates  to  the  business  of 
amending  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  and  by  no  means 
authorized  them  to  create  a  new  constitution. 

Although  the  population  of  this  state  was  then  compa- 
ratively small,  amounting  probably  to  about  two  hundred 
and  fifty  thousand  souls,  the  sagacity  and  the  clear  vision 
of  Gov.  Clinton  and  other  distinguished  opponents  of  the 
national  scheme,  must  have  enabled  them  to  foresee  the 
high  destiny  of  the  state  of  New-York. .  They  no  doubt 
took  into  consideration  the  facts  that  its  territory  stretch- 
ed from  the  Atlantic  ocean  to  the  great  inland  seas  of  the 
west;  that  its  southern  frontier  included  the  best  harbor  in 

2 


18  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1788. 

North  America,  and  perhaps  in  the  world  ;  that  its  soil 
was  incomparably  rich  and  luxuriant  j  that  water  power 
for  driving  all  kinds  of  machinery  for  manufacturing  pur- 
poses was  abundant  in  every  part  of  the  state;  that  its  fa- 
cilities for  artificial  internal  navigation  were  greater  than 
any  other  equal  portion  of  the  known  world ;  that  its  cli- 
mate was  adapted  to  the  production  of  a  hardy  and  enter- 
prizing  race  of  men,  and  was  remarkably  salubrious,  and 
that  nature  had  so  formed  our  coast  that  the  foreign  trade 
for  North  America  would  naturally  centre  at  the  port  of 
New-York.  This  prospective  view  must  have  convinced 
them  that  New-York  would  become,  what  in  fact  she 
now  is,  THE  EMPIRE  STATE.  It  is  uot,  therefore,  at  all 
surprising  that  her  citizens  should  have  scrutinized  with 
an  anxious  and  jealous  eye,  a  scheme  which,  if  carried  out, 
might  lessen  the  importance  of  the  state,  and  would  throw 
into  a  general  fund,  or  common  national  stock,  that  rich 
revenue  which  would  not  fail  of  being  gathered  from 
goods  imported  into  the  city  of  New-York. 

Mr.  Clinton,  being  governor,  was  the  distributor  of  near- 
ly all  the  state  patronage.  He  was  also  ex-officio  com- 
mander of  the  army  and  admiral  of  the  navy.  It  was, 
therefore,  more  than  insinuated  by  political  writers  of  the 
day,  that  personal  ambition  and  a  love  of  power  had  a 
controling  influence  in  inducing  him  to  oppose  the  adop- 
tion of  the  federal  constitution  ;  or  at  any  rate  that  sinis- 
ter views  and  feelings  sharpened  his  opposition,  and  added 
fire  to  his  zeal. 

It  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  Gov.  Clinton  in  his  speech 
to  the  legislature  in  1788,  although  the  United  States  Con- 
stitution must  have  been  long  before  that  time  reported 
and  published,  and  although  it  had  been  recommended 
that  the  legislature  of  each  state  should  provide  by  law 
for  the  choice  of  delegates  by  the  people  to  decide  on 
the  question  whether  the  proposed  constitution  should  be 


1788.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  19 

adopted,  was  wholly  silent  on  that  subject.  He  does  not 
make  the  slightest  allusion  to  that  great  and  important 
question,  which,  while  he  was  penning  his  speech,  he  well 
knew  excited  the  anxious  solicitude  of  all  men,  not  only 
in  this,  but  in  every  state  in  the  Union. 

The  subject  was,  however,  brought  before  the  legisla- 
ture on  the  17th  of  January,  1788,  by  a  resolution  offer- 
ed by  Mr.  Egbert  Benson,  the  purport  of  which  was  that 
a  convention,  the  members  of  which  should  be  elect- 
ed by  the  people,  should  be  called  in  pursuance  of  the 
recommendation  of  Congress.  Mr.  Schoonmaker,  a  mem- 
ber from  Ulster,  thereupon  proposed  a  preamble  to  the 
resolution  to  the  following  effect  :  "  Whereas  the  said 
convention  of  the  states,  instead  of  revising  and  reporting 
alterations  and  revisions  in  the  Articles  of  Confederation, 
have  reported  a  new  constitution  for  the  United  States, 
which,  if  adopted,  would  materially  alter  the  constitution 
and  government  of  this  state,  and  greatly  affect  the  rights 
and  privileges  of  the  people  thereof."     Therefore,  &c. 

Mr.  Jones  in  support  of  this  preamble,  said,  "  when  the 
members  of  the  convention  were  elected,  they  were  au- 
thorized only  to  amend  the  constitution  and  make  such 
alterations  therein  as  upon  being  confirmed  by  Congress^ 
and  the  respective  state  legislatures  would  be  more  adequate 
to  the  preservation  of  the  Union.  *  *  *  Tj^g  conven- 
tion had  gone  beyond  their  powers,  and  instead  of  amend'- 
ing  the  constitution,  had  framed  a  new  one.'''' 

The  resolution,  however,  for  the  call  of  a  state  con- 
vention finally  passed  both  branches  of  the  legislature. 

The  election  of  delegates  took  place  in  the  sprino-  of 
1788.  The  sole  question  which  appears  to  have  govern- 
ed the  electors  in  the  choice  of  delegates,  was  whether 
the  candidates  were  for  or  against  the  adoption  of  the  new 
constitution.  The  people  of  the  northern  and  middle 
counties   were   generally  against,  and  of   the   southern 


20  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [17S8. 

counties  in  favor  of  the  measure.  Very  acrimonious  pub- 
lications appeared  in  pamphlets  and  in  the  newspapers  on 
each  side  of  the  question.  There  were  also  written  and 
published  many  very  able  dissertations  both  for  and  against 
the  new  scheme  of  government,  and  it  was  about  this  peri- 
od that  the  celebrated  numbers  of  the  Federalist,  written  by 
Hamilton,  Jay  and  Madison  were  published,  extensively 
circulated  and  generally  read. 

In  the  city  of  New-York,  John  Jay,  Alexander  Hamil- 
ton, Chancellor  Livingston,  Richard  Morris,  then  chief 
justice,  and  James  Duane,  mayor  of  the  city,  were  chosen. 
The  strength  of  the  federal  party  in  the  city  of  New- 
York,  and  the  personal  popularity  of  Mr.  Jay,  may  be 
inferred  from  the  fact  that  out  of  2833  votes,  which  were 
the  whole  number  taken,  he  received  2735. 

In  the  county  of  Albany,  where  the  new  constitution 
had  been  burned,  it  is  said,  in  presence  of  some  of  the 
officers  of  the  city   of  Albany,*  Abraham   Ten  Broeck, 

*  The  occasion  which  produced  this  occurrence,  was  as  follows.  The  federal- 
ists of  Albany  on  receiving  news  that  the  constitution  had  been  ratified  by  the  requi- 
site number  of  states,  appointed  a  day  to  celebrate  the  event.  Having  met  on 
that  day,  they  formed  into  a  procession  with  the  intention  of  marching  through 
the  principal  streets  of  the  city.  They  were  led  by  Gen.  Schuyler  and  Stephen 
Van  Rensselaer.  The  anti-federalists  on  the  same  day  came  together  ;  and  some 
inflammatory  speeches  were  made,  and  the  constitution  was  burnt.  While  thus 
highly  excited,  the  two  parties  met  in  Green-street,  and  the  anti-federalists  pro- 
jected a  scheme  of  preventing  the  march  of  the  federalists  through  that  street. 
They  procurred  a  cannon  and  loaded  it  with  pebbles  and  gravel,  with  a  view  to 
discharge  it  in  case  the  federalists  should  have  the  temerityto  attempt  to  force  a 
passage;  but  some  of  the  more  reflecting  and  moderate  anti-federalists,  in  ordfr 
to  prevent  such  an  outrage,  without  the  knowledge  of  the  majority  of  their  poli- 
tical friends  spiked  the  cannon.  The  belligerent  parties  were,  however,  by  this 
time  so  much  excited,  that  this  prudent  precaution  did  not  prevent  an  affray. 

Many  of  the  federalists  with  a  view  of  adding  to  the  pomp  of  their  celebration, 
were  clad  in  military  dress,  and  carried  with  them  swords,  guns  and  bayonets. 
It  is  now  uncertain  which  party  committed  the  first  act  of  violence  ;  it  is  only 
certain  that  they  came  to  blows,  and  that  the  anti-federalists  threw  brick-bats 
and  paving  stones  at  the  federalists,  and  were  in  their  turn  assailed  with  cutlas- 
ses and  bayonets.  Several  persons  were  dangerously  wounded,  but  fortunately 
none  were  fatally  injured.  Isaac  DenniSon,  Esq.,  of  Albany,  who,  though  at  that 
time  quite  young,  was  an  eye  witness  of  this  transaction,  has  favored  me  with 
this  account.  Peter  W.  Yates,  at  that  day  a  lawyer  of  considerable  eminence, 
wa«  one  of  the  most  active  leaders  of  the  anti-federalists  in  this  fracas,  and 


1788.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  21 

Jacob  Cuyler,  Francis  Nicoll,  J.  Bloodgood,  Peter  Gan- 
sevoort,  (the  late  Gen.  Gansevoort,)  John  Lansing,  jr., 
Robert  Yates,  Henry  Outhout,  Peter  Vrooman,  T.  A. 
Ten  Eyck,  and  Derick  Swart,  were  the  anti-federal  candi- 
dates, and  were  elected. 

The  general  result  through  the  state,  was  that  New- York, 
Westchester,  Kings  and  Richmond  counties  chose  federal- 
ists; the  counties  of  Albany,  Montgomery,  Washington, 
Columbia,  Dutchess,  Ulster  and  Orange  anti-federalists, 
and  the  delegations  from  Suffolk  and  Queens,  were  divi- 
ded. The  whole  number  of  delegates  was  67.  This 
statement  of  their  number  and  political  character,  is  taken 
from  the  Albany  Gazette  of  July,  1788,  and  which  pur- 
ports to  have  been  copied  by  the  Gazette  from  a  Pough- 
keepsie  Journal  which  contained  the  proceedings  of  the 
convention.  Mr.  William  Jay,  in  his  life  of  John  Jay, 
(1  vol.  p.  266)  states  the  number  of  delegates  at  fifty-se- 
ven, and  of  this  number  he  says  "  no  less  than  forty-six 
were  anti-federalists."  In  this  I  think  he  must  have  been 
incorrect. 

Besides  the  eminent  men  elected  from  the  cities  of 
New- York  and  Albany,  Gov.  Clinton  was  chosen  from 
the  county  of  Ulster,  Gen.  James  Clinton,  the  father  of 
De  Witt  Clinton,  from  the  county  of  Orange;  Melancton 
Smith  from  the  county  of  Dutchess,  and  sundry  other  em- 
inent men  from  the  counties  situate  on  the  North  River. 
Indeed  I  think  it  reasonable  to  believe  that  this  conven- 
tion contained,  if  not  all,  a  very  large  proportion  of  the 
men  of  influence  and  talents  who  were  then  on  the  poli- 
tical stage. 


would  probably  have  lost  his  life  in  the  conflict,  if  he  had  not  been  saved  by  the 
address  of  Mr.  Dennison,  and  furnished  by  him  with  a  place  of  safety.  Mr.  Abra- 
ham G.  Lansing,  another  anti-federalist,  was  also  exposed  to  imminent  danger. 
This,  I  believe,  was  the  only  instance  in  which  the  public  peace  was  violated 
during  this  controversy. 


22  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1788. 

It  was  organized  on  the  17th  June,  1788,  by  the  ap- 
pointment of  George  Clinton  president^  and  it  immediate- 
ly proceeded  to  form  a  code  of  rules  for  its  government. 
On  the  19th,  the  discusssion  commenced. 

Chancellor  Livingston  opened  the  debate  by  a  very  elo- 
quent address  to  the  convention.  He  pointed  out  the  ne- 
cessity of  the  union  to  this  state,  especially  on  account 
of  its  peculiar  local  situation.  He  traced  generally  the 
leading  and  radical  defects  of  the  then  existing  confede- 
ration, and  strongly  urged  the  magnitude  and  importance 
of  the  question  then  to  be  considered;  and  the  duty  of  the 
members  of  the  convention,  that  they  should  divest  them- 
selves of  every  preconceived  prejudice,  and  deliberate 
with  the  utmost  coolness,  moderation  and  candor. 

The  discussion  of  the  various  clauses  of  the  constitu- 
tion continued  three  weeks,  during  which  several  impor- 
tant amendments  were  proposed  and  adopted.  In  addi 
tion  to  the  amendments  which  had  been  proposed  by  the 
convention  of  Massachusetts,  (for  which  see  2d  Pitkin's 
Civil  and  Political  History  of  the  United  States,  267—8,) 
the  New-York  convention  proposed  (2  Ham.  281)  "  among 
others  of  less  importance,  that  no  persons,  except  natural 
born  citizens,  or  such  as  were  citizens  on  or  before  the 
4th  of  July,  1776,  or  held  commissions  under  the  United 
States  during  the  war,  and  had  since  July  4th,  1776,  be- 
come citizens  of  some  one  of  the  states,  should  be  eligible 
to  the  places  of  president,  vice-president,  or  members  of 
congress — that  no  standing  army  be  kept  up  in  time  of 
peace,  without  the  assent  of  two  thirds  of  both  houses — 
that  congress  should  not  declare  war  without  the  same 
majority — that  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
should  not  be  suspended  for  a  longer  term  than  six  months 
— that  no  capitation  tax  should  ever  be  laid — that  no  per- 
son be  eligible  as  a  senator  for  more  than  six  years  in  any 
term  of  twelve  years  ;  and  that  the  state  legislatures  might 


1788.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  23 

recall  their  senators — that  no  member  of  Congress  be  ap- 
pointed to  any  office  under  the  authority  of  the  United 
States — that  the  power  of  Congress  to  pass  laws  of  bank- 
ruptcy, should  only  extend  to  merchants  and  other  tra- 
ders— that  no  person  be  eligible  to  the  office  of  president 
a  third  time — that  the  president  should  not  command  an 
army  in  the  field  without  the  previous  consent  of  Congress 
— that  Congress  should  not  constitute  any  tribunals  or  in- 
ferior courts,  with  any  other  than  appellate  jurisdiction^ 
except  in  causes  of  admiralty  and  maritime  jurisdiction, 
and  for  the  trial  of  piracies  and  felonies  committed  on  the 
high  seas ;  and  in  all  other  cases,  to  which  the  judicial 
power  of  the  United  States  extended,  and  in  which  the 
supreme  court  had  not  original  jurisdiction,  the  causes 
should  be  heard  in  the  state  courts,  with  right  of  appeal 
to  the  supreme  or  other  courts  of  the  United  States — that 
the  court  for  the  trial  of  impeachments  should  consist  of 
the  senate,  the  judges  of  the  supreme  court  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  senior  judge  of  the  highest  court  in  each 
state — that  persons  aggrieved  by  any  judgment  of  the  su- 
preme court  in  any  case  in  which  that  court  had  original 
jurisdiction,  should  be  entitled  to  a  review  of  the  same  by 
commmissioners,  not  exceeding  seven,  to  be  appointed  by 
the  president  and  senate — that  the  judicial  power  should 
extend  to  no  controversies  respecting  land^  unless  relating 
to  claims  of  territory  or  jurisdiction  between  states  or  be- 
tween individuals,  or  between  states  and  individuals  under 
grants  of  different  states — that  the  militia  should  not  be 
compelled  to  serve  without  the  limits  of  the  state  for  a  long- 
er term  than  stxwjeefcs,  without  the  consent  of  the  legislature 
thereof — and  that  Congress  should  not  impose  any  excise 
on  any  article,  (ardent  spirits  excepted,)  of  the  growth, 
production,  or  manufacture  of  the  United  States,  or  any 
of  them. 


24  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1788. 

On  the  11th  of  July,  Mr.  Jay  moved  "  that  the  consti- 
tution be  ratified,  and  that  whatever  amendments  might 
be  deemed  expedient,  should  be  recommended.''^  This 
motion  called  out  the  most  vigorous  opposition  on  the 
part  of  the  anti-federalists.  They  had  been  elected  with 
the  express  understanding  that  unless  the  proposed  consti- 
tution should  be  materially  altered,  they  should  vote  for 
its  rejection  ;  and  no  doubt  they  sincerely  believed  it 
would  be  unsafe  to  adopt  it,  as  it  came  from  the  hands 
of  the  national  convention.  They  therefore  proposed 
to  amend  Mr.  Jay's  resolution  so  that  it  should  read, "  that 
the  constitution  be  ratified  on  the  condition  that  certain 
specified  amendments  should  be  made.  A  long,  able  and 
eloquent  discussion  followed;  but  before  any  decisive  vote 
was  taken,  news  arrived  that  the  convention  of  New- 
Hampshire  had  adopted  the  constitution  as  reported  by 
the  national  convention.  It  will  be  recollected  that  by 
an  article  of  the  constitution,  when  nine  states  should  ra- 
tify it,  it  was  then  declared  adopted,  and  of  course  the  re- 
maining states,  which  refused  their  assent  to  its  adoption, 
were  to  be  considered  as  seceding  from  the  Union.  The  ra- 
tification of  the  constitution  by  New-Hampshire,  furnished 
evidence  that  the  requisite  number  of  the  states  had  adopt- 
ed it.  After  the  news  of  this  event  was  received  at 
Poughkeepsie,  the  question  which  the  New-York  conven- 
tion had  to  decide  was  changed.  It  was  no  longer  a  ques- 
tion whether  they  preferred  the  new  constitution  to  the 
Articles  of  Confederation ;  but  the  true  question  now 
was,  whether  they  would  secede  from  the  Union  1  And 
here,  in  passing,  I  take  leave  to  remark  that  Gov.  Clin- 
ton and  his  friends  discovered  a  defect  in  policy  or  party 
tact,  in  postponing  to  so  late  a  day,  the  meeting  of  the 
New- York  convention  (for  they  had  the  power  to  fix  the 
time  of  meeting,)  because,  if  they  had  appointed  an  ear- 
lier day,  the  state  of  New- York,  being  at  that  time  a  cen- 


1788.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  25 

tral  state,  and  even  then  influential  and  powerful,  if  it 
had  early  decided  against  the  constitution,  its  opinion  and 
decision  might  have  had  sufficient  influence  with  the  other 
states  to  have  prevented  so  many  as  nine  of  them  from 
adopting  it.  This  the  anti-federalists  should  have  done, 
instead  of  waiting  until  nine  or  ten  states  had  met  and 
decided  in  its  favor,  and  thus  changing  the  character  and 
nature  of  the  question  from  one  of  constitution  making, 
to  a  question  involving  in  it  the  tremendous  consequence 
of  a  secession  from  the  Union. 

The  federalists  now  proposed  to  amend  the  amendment 
offered  by  the  anti-federalists,  by  substituting  the  words 
^^  in  full  coiijidence'''  for  the  words"  on  condition^''  so  that 
Mr.  Jay's  resolution  would  read, 

"  Resolved^  That  the  constitution  be  ratified  in  full  con- 
fidence that  the  amendments  proposed  by  this  convention 
will  be  adopted." 

To  this  resolution,  a  resolution  of  immense  moment,  a 
portion  of  the  anti-federalists — I  presume,  under  the  con- 
fidential advisement  of  Gov.  Clinton,  (forMelancton  Smith, 
his  constant  and  unwavering  friend,  the  man  whom  Gen. 
Hamilton  regarded  as  his  most  formidable  opponent,  was 
one  of  them) — with  great  hesitation  and  reluctance,  yielded 
their  assent. 

They  were  no  doubt  deeply  impressed  with  the  idea 
that  New- York  was  sacrificing  too  much  political  power, 
and  too  great  a  proportion  of  the  natural  advantages  secu- 
red to  her  by  her  geographical  position,  and  with  the 
painful  apprehension  that  so  much  power  by  the  proposed 
constitution  was  conferred  on  the  general  government,  as 
might  endanger  the  personal  liberty  of  the  citizen,  and 
the  independence  of  the  states.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
confusion  then  prevailing  in  the  commercial  regulations 
of  the  different  states^  the  jealousies  and  collisions  which 
it  was  reasonable   to   anticipate   would  grow   up,   and 


26  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1788. 

already  began  to  shew  themselves  among  the  states;  the 
prostration  of  the  credit  of  the  national  confederacy  which 
at  that  time  had  occurred;  the  want  of  confidence  evinced 
by  the  European  governments  in  the  ability  of  Congress 
to  enforce  the  performance  of  treaties;  the  incompetency 
of  the  Articles  of  Confederation  to  enable  Congress  to 
regulate  commerce,  to  resuscitate  public  credit  and  compel 
the  performance  of  treaties;  the  improbability  that  the 
requisite  number  of  states  would  concur  in  such  amend- 
ments to  the  Articles  of  Confederation  as  suited  the  views 
of  the  anti-federalists;  the  danger  which  would  inevitably 
result  to  the  state  of  New-York,  by  a  secession  of  that 
state  from  the  Union;  and  the  already  threatened  determi- 
nation of  the  old  southern  district  to  separate  from  the 
other  part  of  the  state,  and  become  an  integral  portion  of 
that  section  of  the  Union  which  should  adopt  the  constitu- 
tion in  case  the  convention  should  reject  it,  finally  induced 
a  sufficient  number  of  the  anti-federal  members  of  the 
convention  to  vote  in  favor  of  the  adoption  of  the  consti- 
tution, as  with  the  federalists  to  constitute  a  small  majo- 
rity of  that  body. 

On  this  solemn  occasion,  Mr.  Gilbert  Livingston,  who 
bad  been  elected  as  an  anti-federalist,  and  in  truth  was 
such,  is  reported  to  have  expressed  his  own  views,  and 
probably  the  views  and  feelings  of  the  political  friends 
who  acted  with  him,  in  the  following  manner: 

"  Mr.  President — I  hope  for  indulgence  from  this  hono- 
rable house,  that  I  may  shortly  state  the  reasons  which 
actuate  me,  for  taking  the  part  I  do  in  the  business  before 
us.  The  great  and  final  question  on  the  constitution  is 
now  to  be  taken.  Permit  me,  sir,  again  to  say,  that  I 
have  had  a  severe  struggle  in  my  mind  between  duty  and 
prejudice.  I  entered  this  house  as  fully  determined  on 
previous  amendments,  (I  sincerely  believe,)  as  any  one 
member  in  it.     Nothing,  sir,  but  a  conviction  that  I  am 


1788.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  27 

serving  the  most  essential  interests  of  my  country,  could 
ever  induce  me  to  take  another  ground,  and  differ  from  so 
many  of  my  friends  on  this  floor.  I  think,  sir,  I  am  in 
this,  pursuing  the  object  I  had  at  first  in  view — the  real 
good  of  my  country.  With  respect  to  the  constitution 
itself,  I  have  the  same  idea  I  ever  had — that  is,  that  there 
is  not  safety  under  it  unless  amended.  Sometime  after 
we  first  met,  sir,  a  majority  of  those  in  this  house  who 
opposed  it,  did  not  determine  to  reject  it.  Only  one 
question  then  remained — which  was  the  most  eligible  mode 
to  ensure  a  general  convention  of  the  states,  to  reconsider 
it,  in  order  to  have  the  essential  amendments  engrafted  in 
it  1  I  do  not  mean  to  go  into  the  reasons  which  have 
repeatedly  been  urged  on  this  head,  but  only  to  say,  that 
on  the  most  mature  and  deliberate  reflection  on  this  mo- 
mentous occasion,  the  result  of  my  judgment  is,  that  the 
adoption  of  the  resolution  on  the  table,  with  the  bill  of 
rights  and  amendments  contained  in  it,  and  the  circular 
letter  to  the  different  states  accompanying  it,  is,  consider- 
ing our  present  situation  with  respect  to  our  sister  states, 
the  wisest  and  best  measure  we  can  possibly  pursue.  I 
shall  therefore  vote  for  it, 

"As  an  American,  I  am  proud  of  my  country — as  a 
whig,  I  love  it,  and  feel  the  duty  of  guarding  its  rights 
and  freedom  to  the  utmost  of  my  power.  And,  sir,  con- 
sidering my  situation  in  this  house,  as  a  representative  of 
a  respectable  county,  I  feel  the  weight  of  duty  increasing 
in  a  redoubled  proportion. 

"  Sir,  I  know  I  was  elected  a  member  of  this  convention 
from  a  confidence  the  people  had  in  my  integrity;  and, 
sir,  I  trust  I  am  at  this  instant  giving  them  an  unques- 
tionable evidence  of  it.  The  people  of  the  county  I  have 
the  honor  to  represent,  are,  in  general,  thinking  and  sen- 
sible, and  I  have  not  the  least  doubt,  but  they  soon  will, 


28  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1788. 

if  they  at  present  do  not,  see  the  propriety  of  the  measure 
here  pursued. 

"  But,  sir,  I  would  beg  leave  to  mention  another  consi- 
deration, of  a  nature  infinitely  superior  to  anything  which 
possibly  can  be  put  in  competition  with  it,  as  a  motive  of 
action — an  approving  conscience,  and  an  approving  God. 
I  must  hereafter  stand  at  a  bar,  where,  if  the  most  trifling 
conduct  must  be  accounted  for,  (and  which  I  fully  be- 
lieve,) truly  this  most  important  transaction  of  my  life 
will  be  strictly  scrutinized.  To  that  awful  Being  who 
will  there  preside,  I  would,  with  due  submission  and  hu- 
mility, appeal  for  the  rectitude  of  ray  intentions.  I  hope, 
sir,  the  house  will  pardon  me  for  having  been  so  personal 
in  this  address.  I  owe  it,  sir,  to  them  as  well  as  myself, 
especially  to  a  part  of  our  side  of  the  house,  who  I  have 
no  doubt,  are  actuated  by  the  purest  motives,  and  are 
equally  consciencious  with  myself,  on  this  occasion^,  and 
with  whom  and  every  friend  to  his  country,  I  will  steadily 
persevere  in  every  possible  means  to  procure  this  desira- 
ble object — a  revision  of  the  constitution.  For  a  con- 
sistency in  conduct  to  this  honorable  house,  to  my  consti- 
tuents, and  to  my  country,  on  this  occasion,  with  the 
utmost  cheerfulness  do  I  submit  myself." 

The  final  vote  was  taken  soon  after  the  delivery  of  this 
speech.  Fifty-seven  members,  exclusive  of  the  President, 
(Gov.  Clinton,)  were  present,  thirty  of  whom  voted  for 
the  ratification  of  the  constitution,  and  twenty-seven 
against  it.  Mr  William  Jay  (2  Jay,  269.)  says  the  con- 
stitution was  adopted  by  a  majority  of  two  votes  only. 
In  this  he  errs — I  have  now  before  me  the  names  of  those 
who  voted  and  the  manner  in  which  they  voted.  There 
was  a  majority  of  three  in  favor  of  the  constitution. 

This  momentous  decision  took  place  on  26th  July,  1788. 
A   correspondent   from   Poughkeepsie   on  this  occasion 


1788.]  or  NEW- YORK.  '  29 

wrote  to  his  Iriend  in  New-York  in  the  following  rather 
sarcastic  manner: 

"  After  ratifying,  his  excellency  the  President,  according 
to  a  notice  given  last  Thursday,  addressed  the  convention 
very  politely.  The  purport  of  which  was,  that  until  a 
convention  was  called  to  consider  the  amendments  now 
recommended  by  this  convention,  the  probability  was 
that  the  body  of  the  people  who  are  opposed  to  the  con- 
stitution would  not  be  satisfied;  he  would,  however,  as 
far  as  his  power  and  influence  would  extend,  endeavor  to 
keep  up  peace  and  good  order  among  them.  To  which 
the  members  and  spectators  were  very  attentive,  and  more 
than  a  common  pleasantness  appeared  in  their  counte- 
nances." 

A  circular  letter  drawn  by  Mr.  Jay,  addressed  to  the 
other  states  of  the  Union,  earnestly  requesting  them  to 
co-operate  with  this  state  in  an  effort  to  obtain,  by  means 
of  a  convention  to  be  called  for  that  purpose,  the  adoption 
of  the  amendments  which  the  New-York  convention  had 
annexed  to  their  ratification,  was  then  read  and  subscrib- 
ed by  all  the  members  present.  The  convention  immedi- 
ately afterwards  adjourned  without  day. 


30  POLITICAL     HISTORY 


[1788. 


CHAPTER    II. 

FROM  THE  ADOPTION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  CONSTITUTION,  TO  THE 
GENERAL  STATE  ELECTION  IN  1192. 

After  the  adoption  of  the  federal  constitution,  and  the 
organization  of  a  national  government  in  pursuance  of  it, 
and  the  unanimous  election  of  Gen.  Washington  for  the 
first  President,  all  disputes  about  the  principles  contained 
in  the  constitution  seemed  for  a  moment  to  subside,  and 
all  men  appeared  to  unite  in  supporting  the  general  go- 
vernment in  the  exercise  of  its  legitimate  functions. 
Judge  Yates,  whom  we  have  seen  zealously  opposing  the 
constitution,  both  in  the  national  and  state  conventions, 
a  few  days  after  the  ratification  at  Poughkeepsie,  in  giv- 
ing a  charge  to  the  grand  jury  in  Albany,  stated  to  them 
that,  although  "  before  the  constitution  was  ratified  he  had 
been  opposed  to  it,  it  was  now  his  and  every  other  man's 
duty  to  support  it."  But  notwithstanding  this  apparent 
general  acquiescence,  the  parties  which  had  been  formed 
in  the  state  of  New-York,  on  the  question  of  adopting  the 
United  States  constitution,  still  continued  to  exist,  although 
the  cause  of  their  political  association  had  ceased.  The 
patronage  of  the  national  government,  through  the  influ- 
ence of  Gen.  Hamilton,  Mr.  Jay  and  Gen.  Schuyler  with 
the  president,  was  generally  bestowed  upon  men  either 
personally  or  politically  hostile  to  Gov.  Clinton;  and 
Gen.  Hamilton,  it  will  be  found,  always  spoke  of  him  un- 
favorably. Accordingly,  John  Jay  was  appointed  chief 
justice  of  the  United  States;  James  Duane  judge  of  the 
district  of  New-York;  Richard  Harrison,  United  States 
attorney,  and  William  S.  Smith,  marshal;  all  active  and 
zealous  opponents  of  Gov.  Clinton.  Gen.  Hamilton 
himself,  who  was  at  the  head  of  the  opposition   to  the 


1788.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  31 

Clinton  party,  and  was  indeed  the  life  and  soul  of  that 
opposition,  was  made  secretary  of  the  treasury  of  the 
United  States.  Although  these  gentlemen  were  all  of 
them  eminently  fitted  for  the  offices  to  which  they  were 
respectively  appointed,  yet  while  such  men  as  Melancton 
Smith,  Judge  Yates,  &c.  &c.  were  to  be  found  among 
the  friends  of  Gov.  Clinton,  it  is  not  to  be  presumed  that 
this  exclusive  selection  of  his  opponents  as  the  recipients 
of  the  bounty  of  the  United  States  government,  would 
have  been  made  in  the  entire  absence  of  party  views. 
There  seems  to  me  good  reasons  for  believing  that  the 
design  of  Gen.  Hamilton  and  his  federal  friends  in  this 
state,  who  had  the  ear  of  Washington,  was,  so  to  use  the 
national  patronage  as  to  curtail  the  influence  of  Gov. 
Clinton,  and  finally  prostrate  both  him  and  his  party. 
But  Mr.  Clinton  was  still  strong  in  the  affections  of  the 
people.  A  majority  of  the  legislature  was  with  him,  and 
the  absolute  control  he  held  over  the  patronage  of  the 
state,  gave  him  an  influence  far  greater  than  the  patronage 
of  the  general  government  would  have  conferred  on  any 
individual  citizen,  if  the  power  of  distributing  it  had  been 
vested  in  that  individual  alone. 

There  were  in  the  constitution  of  this  state,  which  w^as 
adopted  in  1777,  two  anomalies.  The  one  was  the  coun- 
cil of  revision,  composed  of  the  chancellor,  judges  of 
the  supreme  court  and  governor,  which  held  a  nega 
tive  upon  all  laws  unless  passed  by  two-thirds  of  both 
houses  of  the  legislature;  and  the  other  was,  the  organi- 
zation of  the  appointing  power.  That  power  was  created 
in  the  following  manner:  The  state,  for  the  purpose  of 
electing  senators,  was  divided  into  four  great  districts, 
the  southern,  middle,  eastern  and  western.  Out  of  each 
district,  once  in  every  year,  the  assembly  were  required 
openly  to  nominate  and  appoint  one  senator,  which  sena- 
tors when  thus  selected,  were,  together  with  the  governor, 


32  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1788. 

to  form  a  council  of  appointment.  The  governor  had  a 
right  to  give  a  casting  vote,  but  had  no  vote  for  any  other 
purpose.  He  was  constituted  the  president  of  this  board, 
and  by  the  23d  article  of  the  constitution,  he  was  required 
"  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  council,  to  appoint 
all  officers"  whose  appointment  was  not  otherwise  pro- 
vided for  in  that  constitution.  Under  this  clause,  the 
governor  claimed  and  exercised,  and  in  my  judgment, 
rightfully,  (although  that  claim,  when  attempted  to  be 
exercised  by  Gov.  Clinton's  successor,  was  resisted,)  the 
exclusive  right  of  nomination.  All  civil  and  military 
officers,  from  the  heads  of  the  departments,  chancellor 
and  judges  of  the  supreme  court,  down  to  and  including 
all  justices  of  the  peace  and  auctioneers,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  state  treasurer  and  a  few  petty  city  and  town 
officers,  were  thus  in  effect,  appointed  by  the  governor. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  as  well  to  remark  in  this  place  as 
any  other,  that  the  form  of  the  government  of  New- 
York,  was  originally  less  democratic  than  that  of  any 
other  state  in  the  Union.  This  was  probably  owing  to 
two  causes.  The  one  was,  that  at  the  commencement  of 
the  revolution,  there  was  more  of  aristocracy  here  than  in 
any  other  state.  In  the  city  of  New-York,  there  were 
several  wealthy,  and  what,  although  the  country  was 
young,  may  be  called  ancient  families.  In  Westchester 
were  the  Morrises  and  Van  Cortlands;  along  the  North 
river,  were  the  Livingstons,  Coldens,  &c.;  at  Albany, 
were  the  Van  Rensselaers  and  Schuylersj  and  as  far  west 
as  Johnstown,  the  powerful  and  popular  Sir  William 
Johnson  had  stationed  himself.  Several  of  these  families 
held  large  tracts  of  land,  and  derived  a  princely  support 
from  a  numerous  tAantry.  Such  a  condition  of  things 
must  have  created  different  manners,  a  different  current  of 
thought  and  reasoning,  and  in  fact,  an  entirely  different 


1788.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  33 

state  of  society  from  that  which  existed  in  most  of  our 
sister  states,  and  particularly  those  of  New-England. 

The  other  cause  which  I  shall  mention,  is  that  the  con- 
stitution of  New-York,  was  one  of  the  first  that  was 
framed.  That  pure  and  patriotic  lover  of  liberty,  John 
Jay,  who  was  its  principal  author,  had  neither  precedent 
nor  experience  to  guide  him.  He  knew  from  the  history 
of  ancient  republics,  that  national  liberty  had  been  of- 
ten endangered  and  sometimes  annihilated,  by  that  state 
of  anarchy  which  resulted  from  vesting  too  much  power 
in  the  multitude  ;  and  was  anxious  to  guard  against  it. 
Hence  the  independent  tenure  of  office  of  the  state  ju- 
diciary; hence  the  restriction  on  the  right  of  suffrage,  and 
hence  the  immense  patronage  conferred  by  the  constitu- 
tion of  1777,  on  the  executive.*  Mr.  Jay  did  not  at  that 
time  know — he  could  not  know,  what  a  flood  of  light  the 
common  school  system  was  about  to  pour  upon  the  mass 
of  mind.  He  did  not  anticipate  that  a  moral  revolution  in 
the  human  intellect  was  to  succeed  the  political  revolution 
in  the  United  States.     [* See  Note  K.] 

But  if  the  patronage  placed  by  the  constitution  in  the 
hands  of  Gov.  Clinton  was  great,  certain  it  is  that  few 
men  ever  lived  in  this  or  any  other  state,  who  knew  better 
how  to  render  that  patronage  subservient  to  the  political 
views  of  himself  and  his  friends,  and  at  the  same  time 
avoid  any  just  ground  of  complaint  on  the  part  of  the 
public.  He  knew  men,  and  knew  them  wellj  and  knew 
how  by  the  means  within  his  power,  to  mould  them  to  his 
purposes;  while  his  sagacity  and  prudence  prevented  him 
from  resorting  to  violent  acts,  or  to  an  apparent  proscrip- 
tive  system  against  those  who  differed  from  him  in  opinion. 
In  the  exercise  of  the  appointing  power,  his  policy,  though 
liberal,  was  steady;  and  all  his  appointments  seem  to  have 
been,  and  no  doubt  were,  well  calculated  to  sustain  him- 
self and  his  party  against  the  weight  of  character  and  in- 

3 


34  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1788. 

fluence  of  his  opponents,  wielding  as  they  did,  the  whole 
patronage  of  the  general  government 

On  the  13th  Oct.,  1788,  the  governor  issued  a  procla- 
mation requiring  the  legislature  to  meet  at  Albany  on  the 
eighth  day  of  December,  alleging  that  events  had  occur- 
red since  their  last  meeting,  which  rendered  it  necessary 
that  they  should  convene  at  an  earlier  day  than  that  fixed 
by  law  for  their  annual  meeting.  On  the  day  appointed, 
the  legislature  met,  and  John  Lansing,  Jr.,  was  unanimous- 
ly elected  speaker  of  the  assembly. 

The  governor  in  his  speech,  stated  to  the  two  houses, 
that  he  had  convened  them  at  that  early  day,  that  he  might 
seasonably  lay  before  them  the  proceedings  of  the  con- 
vention at  Poughkeepsie,  and  the  ordinance  of  congress 
for  putting  in  operation  the  constitution  for  the  United 
States,  which  had  been  adopted  by  that  convention.  He 
invited  the  attention  of  the  legislature  to  the  amendments 
proposed  by  the  New-York  convention,  and  to  the  decla- 
ration of  rights  which  accompanied  the  ratification,  and  he 
alleged  that  the  act  of  ratification  was  assented  to  "  on 
the  express  confidence,  that  the  exercise  of  different  pow- 
ers, would  be  suspended  until  it  should  undergo  a  revi- 
sion by  a  general  convention  of  the  states."  He  there- 
fore urged  them  to  use  their  best  endeavors  for  effecting  a 
measure  (a  general  convention,)  so  earnestly  recommend- 
ed by  the  convention,  and  anxiously  desired  by  their  con- 
stituents." 

I  cannot  persuade  myself  that  so  sagacious  a  politician 
as  Gov.  Clinton,  seriously  anticipated  that  another  na- 
tional convention  would  or  could  be  called.  It  seems 
more  probable  that  this  recommendation,  and  the  early 
call  of  the  legislature,  were  intended  to  afford  evidence  of 
the  sincerity  of  his  past  opposition  to  the  federal  constitu- 
tion, and  as  a  manoeuvre  to  keep  his  party  together  in  the 
state  of  New-York.     Eleven  states  had  adopted  the  con- 


1788.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  35 

stitution  in  the  form  reported  by  the  national  convention, 
and  most  of  them,  I  believe,  without  suggesting  any  ma- 
terial alterations.  Was  it  to  be  expected  that  these  states 
would  consent  to  give  up  all  they  had  done,  suffer  the 
great  questions  which  had  been  settled  by  a  majority  of 
the  states  to  be  again  agitated,  and  put  every  thing  afloat 
by  the  call  of  a  new  convention  ? 

On  the  15th  of  December,  the  two  houses  proceeded  to 
elect  five  delegates  to  represent  the  state  in  the  continen- 
tal congress.  In  the  election  of  these  delegates,  the  par- 
ty lines  were  distinctly  developed.  The  delegates  sup- 
ported by  the  anti-federal  party  in  the  assembly  were, 
Abraham  Yates,  Jun.,  David  Gelston,  Philip  Pell,  John 
Hathorn,  and  Samuel  Jones;  those  supported  by  the  fe- 
deralists were  Ezra  L'Hommedieu,  Egbert  Benson,  Leo- 
nard Gansevoort,  Alexander  Hamilton,  and  John  Law- 
rence. The  anti-federal  candidates  were  nominated  by 
the  assembly  by  an  average  majority  of  about  ten  votes, 
but  the  senate  nominated  Mr.  L'Hommedieu  and  the  oth- 
er federal  candidates.  Upon  a  joint  ballot  the  anti-fede- 
ralists were  elected.  This  vote  shows  that  the  federalists 
had  gained  considerably  in  the  assembly  since  the  session 
of  1787,  and  had  actually  obtained  a  majority  in  the  senate. 
It  is  worthy  of  remark  that,  although  by  the  United  States 
constitution,  the  government  under  it  was  to  go  into  ope- 
ration the  succeeding  spring,  and  therefore,  provision  by 
a  law  of  the  respective  states  for  the  appointment  of  elec- 
tors of  president  and  vice-president,  and  for  the  election 
of  senators  and  representatives  in  congress,  was  required 
to  be  made,  the  governor  in  his  annual  address,  did  not 
allude  to  the  subject.  The  senate,  however,  early  sent 
to  the  assembly,  a  bill  providing  for  the  appointment  of 
presidential  electors,  but  on  the  22d  of  December,  the 
house,  by  a  vote  of  33  to  21,  on  the  motion  of  Mr.  Ad- 
gate,  rejected  the  bill.     The  assembly,  on  the  same  day. 


36  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1788. 

in  committee  of  the  whole,  resolved  that  a  committee  be 
appointed  to  draft  an  address  of  the  legislature  to  con- 
gress, requesting  that  body  as  early  as  possible,  to  call  a 
convention  for  the  purpose  of  proposing  amendments  to 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States.  These  acts  show 
very  conclusively  the  temper  and  feelings  of  the  party 
which  held  the  majority  in  the  assembly.  But  I  cannot 
persuade  myself  that  such  men  as  Samuel  Jones,  Gilbert 
Livingston,  Edward  Savage  and  other  members  of  that 
body,  really  entertained  an  expectation  that  a  second  con- 
vention would  be  called,  or  that  the  constitution  as  adopt- 
ed, would  not  go  into  operation.  I  regard  their  move- 
ments as  having  been  prompted  solely  by  a  desire  of  ex- 
citing public  attention,  and  of  disciplining  and  more  effec- 
tually combining  together  their  party,  of  which  Gov.  Clin- 
ton was  the  head.  Accordingly  we  find  that  provision  was 
shortly  afterwards  made  for  the  appointment  of  electors 
of  president  and  vice-president,  and  on  the  19th  January, 
Mr.  Jones  (an  an ti- federalist)  introduced  into  the  assem- 
bly a  bill  prescribing  the  time  and  manner  of  choosing 
senators  of  the  United  States.  But  the  two  houses  could 
not  agree  on  the  mode  of  choosing  senators,  the  conse- 
quence of  which  was,  that  no  senators  in  congress  were 
elected  by  that  legislature,  and  New- York  was  not  repre- 
sented in  the  United  States  senate,  during  the  first  session 
of  the  first  congress.  Presidential  electors  were,  how- 
ever, chosen,  and  a  law  was  passed  by  the  New-York  le- 
gislature for  dividing  the  state  into  Districts,  and  provid- 
ing for  the  election  of  six  members  of  the  house  of  re- 
presentatives of  the  United  States.  Egbert  Benson,  Wil- 
liam Floyd,  John  Hathorn,  Jeremiah  Van  Rensselaer,  and 
Peter  Sylvester,  were,  under  this  law,  elected  the  first 
members  of  congress  from  this  state,  under  the  present 
constitution. 


1789.]  4       OF    NEW- YORK.  37 

During  this  session  of  the  New-York  legislature,  the 
act  "  for  the  amendment  of  the  law  and  better  advance- 
ment of  justice"  was  passed.  This  important  statute, 
which  not  only  greatly  improved  the  practice  of  law, 
but  introduced  some  new  and  valuable  improvements  in 
our  system  of  jurisprudence,  was  drawn  by  Samuel  Jones, 
and  probably  its  passage  was  in  a  great  measure  effected 
through  one  or  both  branches  of  the  legislature,  (for  it 
encountered  a  vigorous  opposition  in  the  senate,)  by  his 
address,  talents  and  influence.  This  act,  together  with 
many  other  important  laws,  particularly  those  relating  to 
real  estate,  were  drawn  by  that  great  man  and  eminent  and 
learned  lawyer.  They  are,  it  is  true,  mainly  transcripts 
from,  and  digests  of,  the  British  statutes,  but  the  ex- 
treme care  and  accuracy  with  which  he  executed  this  task^ 
afford  decisive  evidence  of  clearness  of  intellect  and  great 
legal  acumen.      [See  Note  L.] 

The  term  of  office  of  Gov.  Clinton  would  expire  in 
July,  1789,  the  political  year  under  the  old  constitution  ter- 
minating at  that  period  of  time.  As  the  election  for  go- 
vernor was  to  take  place  in  April  following,  that  circum- 
stance added  to  the  excitement  in  the  ranks  of  the  two 
parties  ;  and  their  movements,  both  as  respected  mea- 
sures and  the  state  appointments,  appear  to  have  been 
made  with  some  reference  to  that  event.  I  shall  relate 
one  instance  of  the  management  of  the  governor,  with 
regard  to  an  important  appointment  which  was  proposed. 

The  supreme  court  at  that  time  consisted  of  three  judg- 
es only.  It  was  urged,  and  at  this  juncture  particularly 
pressed  by  the  federalists,  that  the  increase  of  population, 
business  and  consequent  litigation  in  the  state,  required 
the  appointment  of  an  additional  judge ;  and  it  will  not 
be  forgotten  that  under  the  old  constitution,  the  council 
of  appointment  might,  in  their  discretion,  increase  the 
number  of  judges,  it  being,  however,  optional  with  the  le 


38  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1789. 

gislature  whether  they  would  make  provision  for  the  sa- 
lary of  such  additional  judges.  The  members  of  the 
council  of  appointment  chosen,  in  1788,  were  Jacob  Swart- 
wout,  David  Hopkins,  Lewis  Morris  and  Philip  Schuyler, 
a  majority  of  whom  were  federalists.  From  a  letter  pur- 
porting to  have  been  written  by  a  member  of  the  legisla- 
ture, published  in  the  Albany  Gazette,  in  January,  1789,  it 
appears  that  early  in  the  session,  the  members  of  the 
council,  urged  the  governor  to  call  them  together  for  the 
purpose  of  appointing  a  fourth  judge.  "  He  gave  them 
for  answer,"  (says  the  letter  writer,)  "  that  when  his  bu- 
siness would  admit,  and  necessity  required,  he  would  do 
so.  The  next  day  the  house  elected  a  new  council, 
consisting  of  Messrs.  Van  Ness,  Williams,  Townsend 
and  Hathorn,  all  anti-federalists." 

The  success  of  the  federalists  in  procuring  the  adoption 
of  the  United  States  constitution,  and  the  disposition 
generally  manifested  by  the  people  to  support  the  general 
government,  induced  their  leaders  in  New-York  and  Alba- 
ny, to  make  a  vigorous  opposition  to  the  re-election  of 
Gov.  Clinton  J  and  the  open  and  zealous  opposition  he  had 
made  to  the  adoption  of  the  federal  constitution,  inspired 
them  with  sanguine  hopes  of  success.  Their  great  diffi- 
culty was  to  find  a  suitable  and  strong  candidate.  In  the 
year  1785,  Mr.  Jay  had  been  applied  to,  to  stand  a  candi- 
date for  governor,  by  Gen.  Schuyler  and  other  distinguish- 
ed federalists,  but  he  peremptorily  declined.  His  reasons 
for  declining  are  contained  In  a  letter  addressed  by  him 
to  Gen.  Schuyler,  dated  June  10,  1785.  They  are  credit- 
able to  him  as  a  citizen  and  a  patriot.  He  stated,  that  "  if 
a  change  had,  in  the  general  opinion,  become  not  only 
advisable  but  necessary^  and  the  good  expected  from  that 
change  depended  on  Am,"  the  objections  he  then  made, 
would  have  yielded  to  the  consideration  that  a  good  citi- 
zen ought  cheerfully  to  take  any  station  which  on  such 


1789.]  OF   NEW-YOBK.  39 

occasions,  his  country  might  think  proper  to  assign  to 
him,  without  in  the  least  regarding  personal  consequences; 
but  that  he  had  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  such  occasion 
did  not  then  exist.  (1  Jay,  198.)  In  1789,  the  official 
services  of  Mr.  Jay  in  organizing  the  new  national  govern- 
ment, were  much  needed;  and  we  have  seen  that  he  was 
soon  after  placed  at  the  head  of  the  judiciary  of  the  United 
States.     He  therefore  was  not  to  be  thought  of. 

On  the  11th  February,  a  meeting  of  Federalists  was 
held  in  the  city  of  New-York,  at  which  Robert  Yates  was 
nominated  as  the  opposing  candidate  to  Gov.  Clinton. 
At  this  meeting,  Alexander  Hamilton,  Robert  Troup, 
Wm.  Duer,  Aaron  Burr,  and  sundry  other  persons,  were 
appointed  a  committee  of  correspondence  to  promote  the 
election  of  Judge  Yates;  and  on  the  17th  of  February, 
Gen.||Schuyler  and  Gen.  Abraham  Ten  Broeck,  in  con- 
nection with  several  other  citizens  of  Albany,  together 
with  Philip  Livingston  and  Richard  Harrison,  of  New- 
York,  addressed  a  letter  to  him,  requesting  him  to  allow 
his  name  to  be  used  as  a  candidate  for  governor,  with  a 
view  to  "  heal  the  unhappy  divisions  in  the  country."  To 
this  letter,  Judge  Yates  replied  on  the  24th  of  February, 
and  consented  to  stand  as  such  candidate. 

The  object  which  Gen.  Hamilton  and  the  leading  fede- 
ralists had  in  view,  in  selecting  Mr.  Yates  as  their  candi- 
date, is  very  obvious.  It  was  true  he  had  been  a  zealous 
and  efficient  opponent  to  the  adoption  of  the  new  con- 
stitution, both  in  the  state  and  national  conventions.  He 
could  not  therefore,  have  been  their  first  choice.  But 
the  result  of  the  preceding  annual  election,  had  indica- 
ted that  a  majority  of  the  electors  were  in  favor  of 
sustaining  Gov.  Clinton,  and  they  hoped  by  having 
Judge  Yates  for  their  candidate,  to  detach  from  Mr. 
Clinton  so  many  of  his  political  friends  as  combined 
with  all  the  federalists,  would  procure  the  election  of  Mr. 


40  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1769. 

Yates.  That  such  was  the  object,  is  rendered  the  more  cer- 
tain from  the  fact,  that  chief  justice  Morris — who  undoubt- 
edly, would  have  better  suited  the  majority  of  the  fede- 
ralists, had  been  spoken  of,  and  who,  there  is  good  rea- 
son to  believe,  would  have  accepted  the  nomination,  had 
it  been  tendered  to  him,  by  his  letter  dated  and  published 
27th  February,  three  days  after  Judge  Yates  accepted  the 
nomination — publicly  declined,  alleging  as  a  reason,  that 
if  he  continued  to  permit  himself  to  be  mentioned  as  a 
candidate,  the  tendency  would  be  to  divide  the  votes  of 
his  political  friends.  In  fact,  the  federalists  in  their  ad- 
dress, according  to  Mr.  Davis  (1.  Memoirs  of  Burr,  287.) 
issued  on  announcing  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Yates,  avow 
their  preference  to  chief  justice  Morris.  This  sort  of  par- 
ty management  is  generally  weak  and  puerile,  and  al- 
ways wrong.  The  legitimate  base  upon  which  parties  in 
a  free  government  are  founded,  is  an  honest  difference  of 
opinion  in  respect  to  measures; — and  this  is,  at  any  rate, 
the  pretence  which  all  political  parties  put  forth.  To 
support  therefore,  a  candidate  for  an  important  office  who 
avows  that  he  in  principle  is  in  favor  of  the  measures  to 
which  we  profess  ourselves  opposed,  and  upon  which  op- 
position, our  party  associations  are  ostensibly  founded,  is 
at  once  yielding  the  ground  of  principle,  upon  which  we 
stand.  Probably  the  declaration  made  by  Judge  Yates, 
in  his  charge  to  the  grand  jury  at  Albany,  to  which  I  have 
before  alluded,  may  have  been  used  by  the  federal  lead- 
ers as  an  apology  to  their  friends  for  supporting  an  anti- 
federalist  ;  and  possibly  the  declaration  then  made  by  Mr. 
Yates,  may  have  been  made  in  pursuance  of  a  previous 
understanding  between  him  and  some  of  his  former  poli- 
tical enemies.  It  will  be  perceived  that  Col.  Burr  was 
appointed  a  member  of  the  committee  of  correspondence, 
by  the  meeting  in  New-York,  held  on  the  21st  of  Febru- 
ary.    He  therefore,  it  seems,  was  one  of  the  anti-federal- 


1789.]  OF  NEw-yoRK.  41 

ists  who  joined  in  the  opposition  to  Gov.  Clinton;  and  1 
find  in  the  newspapers  of  that  day  that  at  Albany,  Schenecta 
dy,  and  several  other  places,  meetings  were  held,  claiming 
to  be  exclusively  an ti- federal,  who  nevertheless  resolved 
to  support  Judge  Yates.  I  remark,  however,  in  passing, 
that  the  assertion  of  Mr.  Davis  in  his  life  of  Burr,  that 
he  uniformly  acted  with  the  democratic  party,  is  contra- 
dicted by  his  course  at  this  election.     [See  Note  V.] 

{April^  1789.) — The  election  was  warmly  contested. 
It  generally  terminated  in  favor  of  the  federalists. 

The  counties  of  New-York,  Westchester,  Dutchess, 
Columbia,  Albany,  and  Montgomery,  gave  federal  majori- 
ties, and  generally  elected  federal  members  of  Assembly, 
so  that  that  party  was  now  in  the  majority  in  that  house, 
and  in  the  senate  they  fully  retained  their  strength  j  but 
Gov.  Clinton  was  notwithstanding,  re-elected  by  a  majo- 
rity of  four  hundred  and  twenty-nine  votes.  .  His  election 
was  saved  by  the  county  of  Ulster; — the  county  in  which 
he  commenced  his  professional  and  political  life.  Out  of 
twelve  hundred  and  forty-five  votes  polled,  Ulster  gave 
Mr.  Clinton  ten  hundred  and  thirty-nine.  For  the  grati- 
fication of  the  curious,  and  to  show  the  astonishing  in- 
crease of  votes  in  the  state  since  the  year  of  1789, 1  will 
give  the  result  of  the  canvass  of  that  year  in  the  several 
senatorial  districts,  reminding  the  reader  in  the  meantime, 
that  only  freeholders  voted  for  governor  :        ^i^^.J't 

Clinton.  Yates. 

Southern  District, 1885  1875 

Middle  "       2059  1175 

Western         "       2004  2761 

Eastern  "       443  148 


6391  5962 

From  the  above  statement,  it  will  appear,  that  although 
the  election  was  sharply  contested,  the  whole  number  of 


42  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1789. 

votes  given  in  the  (now)  empire  state,  was  but  twelve 
thousand  three  hundred  and  fifty-three. 

That  Governor  Clinton  succeeded  in  this  election,  is  a 
high  evidence  of  his  personal  popularity.  His  friends 
around  him  were  slain,  but  he  himself  walked  off  the 
field  of  battle  in  triumph. 

On  the  6th  day  of  June,  the  governor  issued  his  pro- 
clamation to  convene  the  legislature  at  Albany  on  the  6th 
day  of  July  following.  They  met  on  that  day,  and  Mr. 
Gulian  Verplanck,  a  member  from  the  city  of  New-York, 
was  elected  speaker  of  the  assembly  without  opposition. 
It  will  be  recollected  that  in  consequence  of  a  disagree- 
ment between  the  two  houses  about  the  manner  of  elect- 
ing United  States  senators,  none  were  chosen  by  the  legis- 
lature in  1788.  The  governor  therefore,  in  his  speech  at 
the  opening  of  the  session,  stated  that  the  reason  he  had 
called  an  extra  session  was,  that  the  legislature  at  the  ear- 
liest day,  might  again  have  an  opportunity  of  electing  se- 
nators to  represent  the  state  in  the  senate  of  the  United 
States;  and  he  made  no  other  specific  recommendations. 
The  answer  of  the  two  houses  was  respectful,  and,  in  fact, 
a  mere  echo  to  the  speech  of  the  governor. 

At  this  time  the  principal  offices  in  the  state  were  held 
by  the  following  gentlemen: 

Pierre  Van  Courtland,  lieutenant-governor. 

R.  R.  Livingston,  chancellor. 

Richard  Morris,  chief  justice  of  the  supreme  court. 

Robert  Yates,  and    }  •  . 

T  1,     CI       tr  I,    4.  }  associates. 
John  bloss  Hobert,  ) 

Lewis  Allain  Scott,  secretary  of  state. 

Richard  Varick,  attorney  general. 

Simeon  De  Witt,  surveyor  general. 

Mr.  Egbert  Benson  had  been  attorney  general,  but  upon 

being  elected  a  member  of  congress,  he  resigned  that  of- 


1789.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  43 

fice,  and  on  the  Mth  May,  1789,  Mr.  Varick  was  ap- 
pointed his  successor. 

The  council  of  appointment  were  composed  of  Samuel 
Townsend,  Peter  Van  Ness,  John  Hathorn,  and  John  Wil- 
liams, all  anti-federalists.  On  the  29th  September,  the 
governor,  by  the  consent  of  the  council,  appointed  John 
Lansing,  Jun.,  mayor  of  Albany,  and  Samuel  Jones,  re- 
corder of  New-York;  Aaron  Burr  was,  on  the  same  day, 
appointed  attorney  general,  in  place  of  Mr.  Varick,  who 
had  resigned. 

In  pursuance  of  the  recommendation  of  the  governor, 
the  two  houses  immediately  proceeded  to  make  provision 
by  law,  for  the  choice  of  senators  in  congress,  and  on  the 
21st  July,  they  passed  a  bill  providing  that  when  two  se- 
nators were  to  be  chosen,  and  each  house  nominated  dif- 
ferent persons,  the  senate  should  choose  one  of  the  per- 
sons nominated  by  the  assembly,  and  that  that  house 
should  elect  one  of  the  persons  nominated  by  the  se- 
nate, and  that  in  case  one  senator  only  was  to  be  cho- 
sen, and  the  two  houses  disagreed  in  their  nominations, 
either  house  might  offer  to  the  other  a  resolution  of  con- 
currence from  time  to  time,  naming  therein  such  person 
as  the  house  in  which  the  resolution  originated,  might 
think  proper,  until  a  senator  should  be  chosen  by  the 
concurrence  of  both  houses.  This  singular  project  did 
not  receive  the  approbation  of  the  council  of  revision, 
and  they  returned  the  bill  to  the  legislature,  with  the  fol- 
lowing objections: 

1.  Because,  by  the  constitution  of  the  United  States, 
the  senators  are  required  to  be  chosen  by  the  state  legis- 
lature. The  council  therefore  argued  that  if  in  the  choice 
of  senators,  the  two  houses  do  not  act  in  their  legislative 
capacity,  no  law  is  necessary,  and  the  senators  may  be 
chosen  by  concurrent  resolution.  If  the  two  houses  act 
in  their  legislative  capacity,  then  the  senators  must  be  ap- 


44  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1790. 

pointed  by  a  law  passed  in  the  usual  form.  [In  the  latter 
case,  no  senator  could  have  been  elected  against  the  wish- 
es of  the  council  of  revision,  unless  two-thirds  of  the 
members  of  both  houses  concurred.] 

2.  Because,  when  two  senators  are  to  be  chosen  by  the 
mode  proposed  by  the  bill,  one  or  both  may  be  chosen 
contrary  to  the  wishes  of  one  branch  of  the  legislature. 

Two-thirds  of  both  houses  not  being  in  favor  of  the 
bill,  it  was  lost,  and  the  legislature  on  the  19th  of  July, 
by  joint  resolution^  appointed  Gen.  Philip  Schuyler  and 
Rufus  King  senators.  Mr.  King  had  then  recently  remo- 
ved from  the  state  of  Massachusetts,  which  state  he  had 
for  a  considerable  time  next  and  immediately  before  his 
removal  to  this  state,  represented  in  the  continental  con- 
gress, and  had  distinguished  himself  for  talents  and  use- 
fulness in  a  manner  highly  creditable  in  that  venerable 
and  venerated  body. 

No  other  important  business  was  transacted  during  this 
session. 

At  the  winter  session  in  1790,  on  the  15th  of  Janu- 
ary, Philip  Livingston,  John  Cantine,  Philip  Schuyler  and 
Edward  Savage  were  elected  members  of  the  council  of 
appointment.  Mr.  Livingston  from  the  southern  and 
Gen.  Schuyler  from  the  western  districts  were  federalists, 
and  Mr.  Cantine  from  the  middle,  and  Mr.  Savage  (the 
father  of  the  late  chief  justice  John  Savage)  were  repub- 
licans, a  name  which  the  party  headed  by  Gov.  Clinton, 
began  now  to  assume.  I  am  inclined  to  think,  although 
I  am  not  sure  of  the  fact,  that  all  the  senators  from  the 
middle  and  eastern  districts  were  republicans,  and  that  for 
this  reason  the  federal  majority  in  the  assembly  elected 
Mr.  Cantine  and  Mr.  Savage. 

It  must  not  be  forgotten,  that  Gen  Schuyler  was  at  that 
time  a  senator  in  congress,  which  by  the  bye,  was  then  in 
session,  he  at  the  same  time  holding  his  seat  as  a  senator 


1790.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  45 

of  this  state,  and  as  a  member  of  the  council  of  appoint- 
ment. It  is  somewhat  singular  that  under  such  circum- 
stances he  should  have  been  elected  by  the  assembly  as  a 
member  of  the  council.  It  is  more  than  probable  that  as 
the  relations  of  the  state  with  the  general  government, 
were  just  being  commenced,  the  incompatibility  of  the 
the  two  offices  was  not  thought  of  at  the  time  the  council 
was  chosen,  for  in  less  than  two  weeks  afterwards,  Jan- 
uary 27th,  the  assembly  resolved  34  to  22 — 

1.  That  it  was  incompatible  with  the  United  States 
constitution  for  any  person  holding  an  office  under  the 
United  States  government,  at  the  same  time  to  have  a  seat 
in  the  legislature  of  this  state.  2.  That  when  a  mem- 
ber of  the  state  legislature  was  elected  or  appointed  to 
office  under  the  United  States,  (he  as  I  presume,  accepting 
such  office)  his  seat  in  this  body  should  be  and  was  de- 
clared vacant. 

.  These  resolutions  passed  as  well  the  senate  as  the  as- 
sembly, and  thereupon  the  senate  resolved  that  the  seat 
of  James  Duane,  a  senator  from  the  southern  district,  who 
had  been  appointed  United  States  district  judge,  of  Philip 
Schuyler  from  the  western  district,  who  was  a  senator  in 
congress,  of  John  Hathorn,  a  senator  from  the  middle,  and 
John  Lawrence,  a  senator  from  the  southern  district,  who 
were  members  of  the  United  States  house  of  represent- 
atives, were  vacant. 

There  was  obviously  a  most  conclusive  reason  why 
the  same  persons  could  not  be  members  of  the  national 
and  state  legislature  at  the  same  time,  for  in  such  case 
neither  legislature  could  compel  the  attendance  of  their 
own  members  without  the  danger  of  a  collision  with  the 
other'.  After  the  passage  of  these  resolutions,  Mr.  Can- 
tine,  on  the  3d  April,  raised  the  question  in  council,  whe- 
ther, as  General  Schuyler  was  not  then  a  member  of  the 
senate,  his  seat  at  that  board  had  not  become  vacant? 


46  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1790. 

Mr.  Livingston  offered  a  resolution  to  the  effect,  that  af- 
ter the  assembly  have  appointed  a  senator  a  member  of 
the  council,  if  his  seat  should  afterwards  be  vacated  by 
the  senate,  this  board  are  incompetent  to  disqualify  and 
vacate  the  seat  of  such  member.  The  question  was  of 
course  novel,  and  certainly  curious,  and  somewhat  difficult 
to  decide.  On  the  one  hand  the  constitution  required  that 
a  member  of  the  council  of  appointment,  should  be  a  se- 
nator, and  on  the  other,  if  an  expulsion  by  the  senate 
would  disqualify  a  person  from  acting  as  a  member  of  the 
council  of  appointment,  then  the  majority  of  the  senate 
would  possess  a  control  in  relation  to  the  persons  of  whom 
the  appointing  power  should  be  composed,  inconsistent 
with  what  was  intended  by  the  framers  of  the  constitu- 
tion. 

I  find  that  a  case  occurred  as  early  as  the  year  1781, 
which  brought  up  this  same  question,  but  w4iich  I  do  not 
perceive  was  referred  to  on  the  present  occasion. 

In  October,  1780,  Ephraim  Paine,  a  senator,  was  elect- 
ed a  member  of  the  council  of  appointment.  During  the 
succeeding  winter  session,  he  w'as  expelled  from  the  se 
nate.  After  his  expulsion,  the  assembly  elected  Arthui 
Parks,  a  senator  from  the  middle  district,  a  member  of 
the  council  in  lieu  of  Mr.  Paine.  On  the  29th  March, 
Mr.  Parks  took  his  seat  at  the  council  board,  but  it  ap- 
pears from  the  records  of  the  proceedings  of  that  board, 
[Book  B.  p.  221.]  that  the  council  unanimously  protested 
against  his  right  to  a  seat,  and  entered  their  protest  on  the 
minutes.  What  is  somewhat  remarkable  is,  that  although 
Mr.  Parks  himself  signed  the  protest,  he  continued  to  act 
as  a  member  of  the  council  till  another  was  chosen  the 
next  year  by  the  assembly.  It  does  not  appear  that  the 
council  of"  1790,  acted  on  the  proposition  either  of  Mr. 
Cantine,  or  Mr.  Livingston,  but  a  day  or  two  after  these 
propositions  were  made,  Mr.  Savage  moved  that  the  opin- 


1790.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  47 

ion  of  the  legislature,  on  the  questions  before  the  council, 
be  requested.  That  motion  was  concurred  in,  and  on  the 
5th  April,  Governor  Clinton  sent  a  message  to  the  assem- 
bly, informing  them  of  the  proceedings  in  the  council,  and 
requesting  their  opinion  as  to  the  proper  course  which  the 
board  ought  to  take  in  relation  to  Gen.  Schuyler. 

The  assembly,  after  some  discussion,  resolved,  that  if 
by  any  legal  disability,  the  seat  of  a  senator  becomes  va- 
cant, the  consequences  resulting  from  such  vacancy  in  re- 
lation to  his  subsequent  acts,  is  a  question  of  law,  and 
therefore  it  was  improper  for  the  house  to  express  any 
opinion  on  the  questions  growing  out  of  the  message,  un- 
less a  bill  embracing  those  questions  should  be  presented 
to  them,  in  which  case  it  would  then  become  their  duty 
to  act  as  a  branch  of  the  law  making  power. 

Gen.  Schuyler  persisted  in  his  right  to  a  seat  at  the  ap- 
pointing board  ;  for  at  a  subsequent  day  an  objection  was 
again  made  in  the  council  to  his  appearance  there,  but 
he  himself  moved  that  the  council  proceed  in  the  despatch 
of  its  ordinary  business.  Whether  the  question  arising 
on  this  motion  in  form,  was  decided  by  the  council,  does 
not  appear;  but  it  is  certain  the  general  continued  to  act 
as  a  member  of  the  council  until  a  new  one  was  the  next 
year  chosen. 

About  this  time,  Richard  Morris,  the  chief  justice,  re- 
signed his  office,  and  Robert  Yates  was  appointed  to  suc- 
ceed him.  By  the  resignation  of  chief  justice  Morris, 
and  the  appointment  of  Judge  Yates  in  his  place,  a  va- 
cancy of  an  associate  judge  was  created.  Egbert  Benson 
was  the  federal  candidate,  and  received  the  votes  of  gen- 
eral Schuyler  and  Mr.  Livingston  ;  John  Lansing,  Jun., 
was  the  republican  candidate,  and  was  supported  by 
Messrs.  Cantine  and  Savage,  and  appointed  by  the  cast- 
mg  vote  of  the  governor.  About  the  same  time  Abra- 
ham Yatesj  Jun.,  was  appointed  mayor  of  Albany,  Peter 


48  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1790. 

Gansevoort  sheriff,  and  Richard  Lush  clerk.  These  ap- 
pointments were  also  made  by  the  casting  vote  of  the  go- 
vernor. Gen.  Schuyler  and  Mr.  Livingston  voting  for 
Gen.   Ten  Broeck  for  mayor,  and  John  Tayler  for  clerk. 

It  would  seem  from  the  fact  that  the  dissenting  coun- 
cillors caused  to  be  entered  on  the  minutes,  the  names  of 
the  persons  whom  they  wished  appointed,  instead  of  a 
mere  entry  of  no,  to  the  governor's  nomination,  that  the 
exclusive  right  of  the  governor  to  nominate  was  ques- 
tioned at  this  early  day,  but  I  have  not  perceived  that  it 
became  a  matter  of  discussion  in  the  newspapers  until 
several  years  afterwards. 

From  the  result  of  the  general  election  in  April,  1790, 
I  cannot  perceive  evidence  of  any  material  change  in  the 
political  opinion  of  the  electors.  The  election,  no  doubt, 
resulted  in  a  nominal  federal  majority  in  both  houses,  but 
party  lines  were  not  then  as  distinctly  marked  as  they  are 
at  present,  and  several  of  the  members  of  assembly  and 
senate,  who  were  called  federalists,  were  friendly  to  Gov. 
Clinton,  and  were  unwilling  to  be  governed  in  their  offi- 
cial acts  by  party  considerations.  The  election  of  Aaron 
Burr  to  the  United  States  senate,  in  opposition  to  so  dis- 
tinguished a  federalist  as  Gen.  Schuyler,  of  which  I  shall 
speak  more  particularly  hereafter,  is  a  decisive  proof  of 
this  position. 

Ever  since  the  organization  of  the  United  States  go- 
vernment under  the  new  constitution,  the  funding  system 
proposed  by  Gen.  Hamilton,  and  the  creation  of  a  nation- 
al bank,  had  been  a  subject  which  excited  much  attention, 
and  about  which  the  public  mind  was  greatly  divided. 
The  most  objectionable  part  of  General  Hamilton's  scheme 
was  the  assumption  by  the  nation,  of  the  debts  of  the  re- 
spective states,  and  the  chartering  of  a  bank.  To  these 
measures  the  republicans  of  this  state  were  generally  op- 
posed.    But  at  the  session  of  congress  in  New-York,  du- 


1791.]  OF   NEW-yoRK.  49 

ring  this  summer,  a  majority  was  obtained  in  favor  of  the 
assumption.  Both  Gen.  Schuyler  and  Mr.  King  voted 
for  the  measure  in  the  senatej  in  the  house  of  represent- 
atives the  vote  of  New-York  was  equally  divided,*  3  to  3. 

The  New-York  legislature  met  in  the  city  of  New-York, 
January  3,  1791,  and  Mr.  John  Watts  was  unanimously 
elected  speaker  of  the  assembly.  A  census  had  been  ta- 
ken in  the  year  1790,  from  which  it  appeared  that  the 
population  of  the  state  then  amounted  to  three  hundred 
and  twenty-four  thousand  one  hundred  and  twenty-seven, 
and  that  the  increase  was  more  than  eighty-five  thousand 
since  1786.  This  increase  was  mainly  in  the  northern 
and  western  parts  of  the  state.  The  governor  in  his 
speech  therefore  called  the  attention  of  the  legislature  to 
that  subject,  and  suggested  that  a  new  apportionment  of 
the  representation  in  the  legislature  was  required  to  be 
made,  and  a  new  division  of  the  senatorial  districts.  Scat- 
tering settlements  having  been  made  westerly  along  the 
valley  of  the  Mohawk  river  as  far  as  the  Oneida  lake, 
and  northerly  along  the  shores  of  lake  Champlain,  the 
country  bordering  on  those  regions  had  been  explored, 
and  Gov.  Clinton  at  that  early  period  suggested  that  fa- 
cilities ought  to  be  afforded  by  clearing  out  the  obstruc- 
tions in  the  Mohawk  river,  and  by  cutting  canals,  to  open 
a  communication  between  lake  Champlain  and  Hudson's 
river  at  the  north,  and  Wood  creek  at  the  west.  The  an- 
swer of  the  two  houses  was  a  mere  echo  to  the  gover- 
nor's speech. 

This  session  seems  to  have  been  a  very  quiet  and  use- 
ful one,  with  a  single  exception.  It  will  be  seen  hereaf- 
ter, that  this  legislature  invested  the  commissioners  of  the 
land  office  with  too  great  discretionary  powers  relative  to 
the  disposition  and  sale  of  the  public  lands.  The  coun- 
cil of  appointment  chosen  this  year,  consisted  of  Isaac 

•See Note  M.  ^ 


50  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1791. 

Roseveltj  Peter  Schuyler,  Thomas  Tillotson  and  Alexan- 
der Webster. 

Gen.  Schuyler  having,  on  casting  lots,  drawn  the  short- 
est term,  in  the  United  States  senate,  his  seat  became  va- 
cant on  the  dth  March,  1791;  it  therefore  became  neces- 
sary in  the  early  part  of  this  session  to  elect  a  senator. 
The  general  was  a  candidate  for  re-election,  and  Mr. 
Aaron  Burr  was  his  competitor.  Col.  Burr  was  nominat- 
ed by  both  houses — in  the  assembly  his  majority  was  five, 
in  the  senate  eight.  At  this  time,  the  senators  were  cho- 
sen by  concurrent  resolution.  In  the  assembly,  after  the 
vote  between  Schuyler  and  Burr  had  been  taken,  a  mo- 
tion was  made  to  strike  out  the  name  of  Burr,  with 
a  view  to  insert  the  name  of  Egbert  Benson,  but  the  ef- 
fort was  unsuccessful.  It  may  appear  singular  that  the  ma- 
jority in  the  senate  was  so  large  against  Gen.  Schuyler,  as 
the  majority  in  that  body  must  have  been  nominally  federal. 
But  Schuyler,  although  he  was  unquestionably  a  man  of 
high  honor  and  integrity,  possessing  enlarged,  liberal  and 
patriotic  views  as  regarded  the  great  interests  of  the  state, 
was  an  ardent  and  violent  partizan,  and  was  presumed  to 
act  under  the  influence  of  Gen.  Hamilton,  who  was  his 
son-in-law,  and  although  he  was  a  man  of  commanding 
appearance,  yet  his  manners  having  been  formed  in  camps 
and  not  in  courts  or  among  the  people,  were  austere  and 
aristocratic,  and  rendered  him  personally  unpopular.  Burr, 
on  the  contrary,  was  a  man  of  very  pleasing  and  fascinat- 
ing address,  and  at  that  period  of  his  life  was  considered 
one  of  the  most  persuasive  and  eloquent  speakers  of  the 
age.  In  politics,  he  belonged  to  the  medium  party.  He 
must  have  been  considered  as  opposed  to  the  ultras  of 
both  parties,  and  could  not  at  any  rate  have  been  viewed 
as  identified  with  the  republican  party,  for  we  have  seen 
him  in  1789,  acting  as  a  member  of  a  corresponding  com- 
mittee to  promote  the  election  of  Judge  Yates,  against  Mr. 


1791.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  61 

Clinton.  He  was  evidently  opposed,  both  to  Clinton  and 
Hamilton.  Indeed  in  his  correspondence  with  Hamilton, 
which  terminated  in  a  duel  fatal  to  the  latter,  several  years 
afterwards,  he  avows  with  a  frankness  unusual  to  him, 
he  always  considered  Clinton  and  Hamilton  as  his  rivals. 
(2  Burr.)  In  fact  the  whole  tenor  of  this  gentleman's 
political  life,impresses  on  my  mind  a  conviction  that  per- 
sonal motives  rather  than  his  opinions  as  to  measures,  had 
a  controlling  influence  over  his  political  conduct.  From 
all  these  considerations,  I  infer  that  several  of  the  fede- 
ralists in  the  senate  preferred  him  to  Gen.  Schuyler. 
Hence  we  find  that  although  the  senate  at  that  time  con- 
sisted of  twenty-four  members,  only  sixteen  votes  were  giv- 
en at  the  election  between  Burr  and  Schuyler,  and  twelve 
of  these  votes  were  given  to  Burr.  Had  the  assembly 
nominated  Judge  Benson,  is  it  not  probable  that  the  re- 
sult in  the  senate  would  have  been  different  ?  "^ 

After  Mr.  Burr  was  elected  senator,  his  office  of  attor- 
ney-general was,  by  the  council,  declared  vacant,  and 
Morgan  Lewis  was  appointed  his  successor,  November 
8,  1791.  Mr,  Lewis  was  connected  with  the  Livingston 
family — a  family  which  had  great  influence  in  the  legisla- 
ture. Might  not  this  arrangement  have  been  anticipated 
before  the  senatorial  election,  and  have  had  some  influ- 
ence on  its  result  ?  It  is  proper,  however,  to  add  that 
Philip  Livingston,  a  federal  senator  from  the  southern 
district,  remained  at  his  post,  and  voted  for  Gen.  Schuy- 
ler. 

The  legislature  proceeded  to  apportion  the  representa- 
tion according  to  the  last  census,  and  to  make  a  new  divi- 
sion of  the  senate  districts.  It  appeared  there  were,  at 
that  time,  nineteen  thousand  six  hundred  and  twenty- 
six  electors  for  senators  in  the  state.  This  would  give 
one  senator  to  eight  hundred  and  seventeen  electors;  and 
on   this  basis  the  ratio  of  representation  was  fixed.     The 


52  POLITICAL    HISTORY.  [1791. 

new  act  proyided  that  the  southern  district  should  be  com- 
posed of  the  counties  of  Suffolk,  Queens,  Kings,  Rich- 
mond, New-York,  and  Westchester,  and  should  be  enti- 
tled to  elect  eight  senators  ;  that  the  middle  district  should 
contain  the  coimties  of  Dutchess,  Ulster  and  Orange,  and 
elect  six  senators;  that  the  eastern  district  should  be  form- 
ed by  the  counties  of  Columbia,  Rensselaer,  (which  had 
been  recently  created)  Washington  and  Clinton,  with  the 
right  to  elect  five  senators,  and  that  the  western  district 
should  be  comprised  of  the  counties  of  Albany,  Montgo- 
mery, Saratoga  and  Ontario,  (the  two  latter  counties  had 
then  been  lately  created)  and  should  be  represented  by 
five  senators.  This  act  was  passed  February  7,  1791. 
That  the  subsequent  narration  may  be  better  understood, 
I  will  here  insert  the  names  of  the  members  of  the  senate 
in  1791. 

From  the  southern  district,  Isaac  Rosevelt,  Philip  Liv- 
ingston, Samuel  Micheau,  Ezra  L'Hommedieu,  Samuel 
Jones,  Durand  Gelston,  Philip  Van  Cortland,  and  Joshua 
Sands. 

Middle  J  James  Clinton,  (brother  of  the  governor,)  Ja- 
cobus Swartwout,  John  Cantine,  James  Carpenter,  Tho- 
mas Tillotson,  and  David  Pye. 

Wester7i,  Philip  Schuyler,  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer, 
Volkert  P.  Douw,  Peter  Schuyler,  and  Leonard  Ganse- 
voort. 

Eastern^  Peter  Van  Ness,  John  Williams,  Edward  Sa- 
vage, Alexander  Webster,  and  William  Powers. 

Subsequent  to  the  passing  of  the  act  for  a  new  divi- 
sion of  the  state  into  senatorial  districts,  the  legislature 
erected  out  of  the  county  of  Montgomery  three  new 
counties,  to  wit,  Herkimer,  Otsego  and  Tioga.  The  act 
creating  these  counties  was  passed  on  the  17th  day  of 
February.  The  assembly  was  to  consist  of  seventy-three 
members,  and  to  be  elected  from  the  several  counties  in 


1791.]  OF    KEW-YORK.  63 

the  proportions  following  :  New- York  7,  Suffolk  4, 
Queens  3,  Kings  1,  Richmond  1,  Dutchess  7,  Westches- 
ter 5,  Oran-ge5,  Columbia  6,  Rensselaer  5,  Washington  4, 
Albany  7,  Saratoga  4,  Montgomery  5,  Ontario  1,  and 
three  counties,  Herkimer,  Otsego  and  Tioga,  each  one. 

James  Kent  was  this  year  a  member  of  the  assembly 
from  the  county  of  Dutchess.  This  was  the  first  appear- 
ance in  public  life  of  that  able  writer  and  eminent  and 
learned  jurist. 

In  addition  to  the  ordinary  appointments,  it  became  ne- 
cessary for  the  governor  and  council  to  appoint  officers 
for  all  the  new  counties  which  had  recently  been  created 
by  the  legislature.  An  entire  civil  list  was  to  be  formed, 
and  in  doing  this  it  would  appear  from  examining  the 
catalogue  of  appointments,  that  the  governor  made  his  se- 
lections with  the  view  to  the  personal  merits  and  fitness 
of  the  candidates,  irrespective  of  the  political  party  to 
which  they  happened  to  belong;  a  circumstance  credita- 
ble to  him,  and  honorable  to  the  principle  of  action  which 
seems  to  have  governed  the  conduct  of  the  political  par- 
ties of  that  day.  Thus,  William  Cooper  was  appointed 
first  judge  of  Otsego  county,  Richard  R.  Smith  sheriff, 
and  Jacob  Morris  clerk;  all  of  them  open,  zealous  and 
decided  political  opponents  of  the  governor.  In  other 
counties,  the  appointments  appear  to  have  been  equally  li- 
beral, and  to  have  been  made  without  reference  to  the 
course  the  persons  appointed  might  pursue  at  the  great 
election  which  was  to  be  held  the  next  year.  I  observe 
that  Jonas  Piatt,  afterwards  a  justice  of  the  supreme  court 
and  a  distinguished  politician,  who  had  then  lately  estab- 
lished himself  at  Whitesborough,  at  that  time  in  the  bo- 
som of  the  wild,  uncultivated  western  forests,  was  this 
year  appointed  clerk  of  the  county  of  Herkimer,  which 
then  included  the  county  of  Oneida  and  the  territory  which 
now  composes  the  great  northern  counties  of  Oswego,  Jef- 


54  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1791. 

ferson,  &c.     The  result  of  the  general  election  in  April, 

1791,  would  seem  to  indicate  an  increase  of  strength  to 
the  republican  party,  but  so  many  local  and  personal  con- 
siderations operated  on  the  minds  of  the  electors,  that  it 
is  difficult  at  this  time  to  form  a  judgment  of  the  exact 
state  of  public  sentiment,  by  the  result  of  an  election  in 
any  particular  county.  Thus  Melancton  Smith,  one  of 
the  most  zealous,  able  and  deserving  friends  of  Gov.  Clin- 
ton was  chosen  one  of  the  members  from  the  city  of  New- 
York,  although  at  that  very  time,  the  city  was  strongly 
federal,  and  elected  Josiah  Ogden  Hoffman,  and  other 
ardent  and  efficient  federalists  as  his  colleagues. 

The  legislature  met  at  New-York,  on  the  5th  January, 

1792,  and  again  Mr.  Watts  was  elected  speaker  of  the 
assembly. 

Among  other  matters  communicated  by  the  governor  in 
his  speech,  at  the  opening  of  the  session,  to  the  legisla- 
ture, he  informed  them  that  large  and  extensive  sales  had 
been  made  of  the  public  lands,  or  as  he  termed  them,  "  the 
waste  and  unappropriated  lands,"  and  he  advised  that  the 
proceeds  should  be  applied  to  the  discharge  of  the  state 
debts,  and  the  surplus  invested  in  such  manner  that  the 
income  arising  therefrom  should  be  applied  annually  to 
defray  the  ordinary  expenses  of  the  state. 

The  assembly  this  year  chose  David  Pye,  Pilip  Van 
Cortland,  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer,  and  William  Powers 
members  of  the  council  of  appointment. 

The  term  of  Gov.  Clinton's  office  expired  this  year, 
and  both  political  parties  early  displayed  a  most  intense 
anxiety  in  relation  to  the  result  of  the  next  general  elec- 
tion. The  federalists  were  for  some  time  in  doubt  about 
the  selection  of  their  candidate,  and  had  great  difficulty  in 
fixing  upon  one  that  was  agreeable  to  them,  who  would 
consent  to  run.  Judge  Yates  positively  declined  another 
contest.     Mr.  Van  Rensselaer,  the  patroon,  was  applied 


1791.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  55 

to,  but  refused  to  be  a  candidate.  Chancellor  Livingston, 
it  seemsj  was  also  spoken  of,  and  Chief  Justice  Jay  Avas 
much  desiredj  but  it  was  very  doubtful  considering  the 
exalted  station  he  held  under  the  general  government,  and 
his  known  aversion  to  personal  collision  and  party  war- 
fare whether,  under  any  circumstances,  he  would  permit 
his  name  to  be  used.  Mr.  Burr  was  spoken  of  by  those 
who  called  themselves  the  moderate  men  of  both  parties. 
Indeed  there  would  seem  to  have  been  a  disposition  among 
a  portion  of  the  republican  party  to  make  him  the 
regular  republican  candidate.  In  an  anonymous  letter, 
dated  at  New- York,  February  13,  and  published  in  the 
Albany  Gazette,  probably  written  by  some  federal  mem- 
ber of  the  legislature,  it  is  stated  that  "  Judge  Yates  re- 
fuses to  be  a  candidate  for  governor^  that  Col.  Burr  has 
come  forward,  and  now  openly  declares  himself  a  candi- 
date. Judge  Yates'  friends,  southern  and  northern,  are 
against  Col.  Burr,  and  we  are  uncertain  who  our  candi- 
dates will  be.  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer  and  John  Jay 
are  spoken  of.  S.  Van  Rensselaer  has  been  waited  on, but 
has  declined.  He  will  be  again  called  on.  The  chan- 
cellor and  Jay  have  also  been  spoken  to,  but  they  have 
declined."  But  it  seems  that  Mr.  Jay,  probably  by  the 
persuasion  of  General  Hamilton,  Schuyler  and  other  friends 
was  induced  to  change  his  determination;  for  on  the  eve- 
ning of  the  13th  of  February,  a  meeting  was  held  in  New- 
York,  at  which  Peter  Van  Ness,  a  senator  from  the  east- 
ern district,  presided,  and  at  which  John  Jay  was  nominat- 
ed for  governor,  and  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer  for  lieuten- 
ant governor.  Judge  Yates  attended  this  meeting,  and 
repeated  his  determination  not  to  be  a  candidate,  but  ex- 
pressed a  firm  resolution  to  support  the  federal  nominee, 
and  stated  that  he  had  not  declined  with  a  view,  as  some 
had  asserted,  to  favor  Col.  Burr's  success. 


56  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1791. 

At  a  more  general  meeting,  held  a  few  days  afterwards 
of  which  Gen.  Ten  Broeck  was  chairman,  and  Gen.  North 
secretary,  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Jay  and  Mr.  Van 
Rensselaer  was  reiterated  and  confirmed,  and  the  most 
efficient  means  were  put  in  requisition  to  insure  their  elec- 
tion. This  was  a  strong  ticket,  probably  the  strongest 
which  could  have  been  formed  by  the  federal  party  in 
the  state. 

On  the  15th  February,  a  republican  meeting  was  held 
in  New- York,  composed  as  was  alledged,  of  gentlemen 
from  various  parts  of  the  state,  of  which  Jonathan  Law- 
rence was  chairman,  at  which  George  Clinton  and  Pierre 
Van  Cortland  were  nominated  for  a  re-election.  Even 
after  this  public  annunciation  of  the  will  of  the  republi- 
can party,  it  would  seem  that  the  support  of  Col.  Burr 
was  still  urged  by  his  friends,  for  I  find  in  the  Albany 
Gazette  of  the  27th  of  February,  an  able  and  well  writ- 
ten communication  over  the  signature  of  a  Plain  Farmer ^ 
in  which  Col.  Burr  is  recommended  for  governor  to  the 
moderate  men  of  both  parties,  on  account  of  his  superior 
talents,  and  because  "  he  did  not  belong  to  either  party P 
If  however,  an  attempt  was  really  made  by  Col.  Burr  and 
his  friends  to  get  up  a  third  party,  of  which  he  was  to  be 
the  head,  it  was  entirely  unsuccessful,  for  public  meetings 
were  forthwith  held  in  almost  every  county  in  the  state 
both  of  the  federal  and  republican  parties,  at  which 
the  nominations  of  Mr.  Clinton  and  Mr.  Jay  were 
unanimously  and  with  apparent  cordiality  concurred  m 
by  the  parties  to  which  they  respectively  belonged.  Af- 
ter all  these  demonstrations  of  the  feelings  and  wishes  of 
the  two  parties,  on  the  15th  of  March,  Col.  Burr  caused 
it  to  be  announced  in  the  newspapers  that  he  was  not  a 
candidate. 

While  these  movements  were  being  made  among  the 
people,  a  violent  attack  was  made  on  governor  Clinton  in 


'fr.' 


1791.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  67 

the  legislature  on  account  of  the  agency  lie  had  had  in 
the  sale  of  the  public  lands,  being  the  same  sale  to  which 
he  alluded  in  his  speech  at  the  opening  of  the  session. 

When  this  state  became  independent  of  Great  Britain, 
it  held  more  than  seven  millions  of  acres  of  wild  unculti- 
vated and  unappropriated  lands.  Sundry  laws  had  been 
passed  during  and  subsequent  to  the  revolutionary  war, 
providing  for  the  sale  and  settlement  of  those  lands. 
But  before  the  year  1790,  few  sales,  considering  the  quan- 
tity of  land  in  market,  had  been  effected.  The  state  be- 
ing in  want  of  funds,  and  all  well  wishers  of  its  growth 
and  prosperity  being  desirous  of  encouraging  adventurers 
to  make  lodgments  in  the  vast  wilds  of  the  west,  the 
legislature  at  their  session  in  1791,  in  order  to  quicken  the 
sales  and  hasten  settlements,  passed  a  law  authorizing  the 
commissioners  of  the  land  office  to  dispose  of  any  of  the 
waste  and  unappropriated  lands  in  this  state,  in  such  par- 
cels and  on  such  terms  and  in  such  manner  as  they  should 
judge  most  condusive  to  the  interest  of  the  public.  The 
reader  will,  at  one  glance,  perceive  the  immensity  of  the 
power  conferred  on  the  commissioners.  In  the  language 
of  a  report  not  long  since  made  by  commissioners  to  the 
legislature  on  another  subject,  it  was  "  too  great  a  power 
to  be  entrusted  to  mortal  hands."  And  yet  it  seems  to 
have  been  done  by  the  consent  of  both  political  parties. 
The  commissioners  of  the  land  office  consisted  of  the 
governor,  secretary  of  state,  attorney  general,  treasurer, 
and  auditor.  Mr.  J.  A.  Scott  was  secretary  of  state, 
Aaron  Burr  attorney  general,  Girard  Bancker  treasurer, 
and  Peter  T.  Curtenius  was  auditor.  Under  the  authori- 
ty of  the  act  to  which  I  have  referred,  these  gentlemen 
sold,  during  the  year  1791,  five  millions  five  hundred  and 
forty-two  thousand  one  hundred  and  seventy-three  acres 
of  land,  for  the  sura  of  one  million  thirty  thousand,  four 
hundred  and  thirty-three  dollars.     Among  the  sales  was 


58  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1791. 

one  to  Alexander  McComb,  of  the  enormous  quantity  of 
three  million  six  hundred  and  thirty-five  thousand  two 
hundred  acres.  The  price  to  him  was  eight  pence  per 
acre,  payable  in  five  annual  instalments,  without  inte- 
rest, subject  to  a  discount  of  six  per  cent,  on  payment  in 
advance,  which  reduced  still  lower  the  actual  price.  (1 
Davis*  Memoirs  of  Btcrr,  326.)  Large  parcels  of  land 
were  also  sold  to  other  individuals,  among  whom  were 
the  Messrs.  Rosevelts,  James  Caldwell,  McGregor,  &c., 
but  these  sales  were  made  at  a  higher  rate.  Some  a  little 
exceeded  three  shillings  per  acre,  some  for  two  shillings 
and    six  pence,  and  some  for  one  shilling. 

When  the  report  was  under  consideration  in  the  assem- 
bly. Col.  Talbot,  a  member  from  Montgomery  county, 
offered  a  series  of  resolutions  severely  condemnatory  of 
the  conduct  of  the  commissioners. 

It  was  alledged  that  the  lands  were  sold  in  too  large 
tracts;  that  they  should  have  been  sold  in  parcels  not  ex- 
ceeding twenty-five  thousand  acres  each;  that  if  they  had 
been  sold  in  that  way,  the  avails  of  the  sales  would 
have  been  much  greater;  and  that  it  was  detrimental  to 
the  advance  of  the  state  in  aggregate  wealth,  and  incon- 
sistent with  our  republican  institutions  to  encourage  a 
monopoly  of  land  in  the  hands  of  a  few  individuals. 
Again,  it  was  urged  as  a  suspicious  circumstance,  that 
lands  were  sold  to  McComb  for  eight  pence  per  acre, 
whereas  five  hundred  thousand  acres  were  sold  by  the 
same  commissioners  and  about  the  same  time,  to  John  and 
Nicholas  Rosevelt  for  three  shillings  and  a  penny  per  acre. 
In  the  heat  of  debate  upon  Mr.  Talbot's  resolutions,  it 
was  broadly  insinuated  that  Gov.  Clinton  and  his  imme- 
diate friends  were  personally,  but  secretly  interested  in 
these  sales.*     The  answer  was  a  total  denial  of  all  cor- 


•  As  the  election  for  governor  was  to  take  place  in  April  following,  it  is  very 
probable  that  this  charge  was  made  partly  with  a  view  to  prevent  the  re-electioA 


1791.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  59 

rupt  motives  on  the  part  of  the  commissioners,  and  in 
fact,  it  does  not  appear  that  any  such  were  attempted  to 
be  provedj  and  an  allegation  that  the  intention  of  the 
legislature  was,  that  the  lands  should  be  sold  at  any  rate. 
It  was  further  alledged,  and  boldly  asserted,  that  no  high- 
er offers  could  be  obtained,  than  those  which  were  finally 
accepted  by  the  commissioners.  It  might  have  been,  and 
probably  was  urged,  that  the  purchasers  of  these  lands 
would  become  active  and  powerful  agents  to  procure  emi- 
grants from  other  states  and  from  abroad,  to  settle  those 
wild  and  uncultivated  forests,  and  thus  a  rapid  increase 
would  be  made  to  the  population,  wealth,  and  resources 
of  the  state;  and  events  have  proved  that  such  has  been 
the  consequence;  but  still  I  cannot  help  thinking,  that 
the  commissioners  acted  not  only  injudiciously,  but  pal- 
pably wrong,  in  selling  such  large  tracts  at  one  time  to 
individuals.  The  wants  of  the  state  were  surely  not  so 
pressing  but  that  if  the  commissioners  had  confined  their 
sales  to  from  one  hundred  to  ten  thousand  acres  to  each 
purchaser,  enough  funds  might  have  been  raised  to  have 
met  all  the  public  exigencies.  Land  agents  on  the  part  of 
the  state,  might  have  been  created,  whose  sole  business 
should  have  been  to  make  sales  of  lands  to  actual  settlers; 
and  whose  gains  should  have  been  in  proportion  to  the 
quantity  of  land  they  should  have  sold.  In  some  such 
way  it  appears  to  me  the  wants  of  the  state  might  have 
been  supplied,  the  settlement  and  cultivation  of  the  wild 
lands  rapidly  made,  and  a  fund  preserved  for  the  benefit 
of  the  state,  of  incalculable  amount.  Mr.  Davis,  in  his 
Memoirs  of  the  Life  of  Col.  Burr,  says,  (1  vol.  p.  329) 

of  Mr.  Clinton  ;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  did  have  a  considerable  effect 
unfavorable  to  him. 

The  lands  purchased  by  McComb,  were  those  in  which  it  was  alledped  the 
governor  was  interested.  But  in  May,  1792,  after  the  election,  Mr.  McConib  made 
oath  before  Richard  Varick,  then  mayor  of  New-York,  (a  federalist,)  that  Gov. 
Clinton  was  neither  directly  nor  indirectly  interested  in  the  lands  purchased  by 
him.    I  have  seen  and  read  McComb's  affidavit. 


60  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1791. 

"these  resolutions  (Col.  Talbot's,)  exempted  Col.  Burr 
from  any  participation  in  the  malconduct  complained  of, 
inasmuch  as  the  minutes  of  the  board  proved  that  he  was 
not  present  at  the  meetings  {being  absent  on  official  duty 
as  Attorney  General^)  when  these  contracts,  so  ruinous  as 
they  alledged,  to  the  interest  of  the  state,  were  made." 
The  resolutions  do  not  exempt  Col.  Burr,  but  it  is  true 
that  they  refer  only  to  "  such  of  the  commissioners  as  had 
an  agency  in  the  sales."  But  if  Col.  Burr  did  not  choose 
to  appear  personally  at  the  board,  can  it  be  possible  that 
these  enormous  sales  and  speculations  were  negotiating 
probably  for  months  and  months  in  the  city  where  Col.  Burr 
resided,  and  principally  effected  with  business  men,  with 
some  of  whom  he  no  doubt  was  in  the  habit  of  daily  inter- 
course, by  a  board  of  which  he  constituted  one  member  of 
the  five  of  which  it  was  composed,  without  knowing  any 
thing  of  the  matter  1  Is  this  consistent  with  the  idea  we 
form  of  the  vigilant,  scrutinizing  Col.  Burr,  who  his  friends 
in  those  days  alledged,  if  he  did  not  know  every  thing  in 
*'  Heaven  and  earth,"  at  least  knew  every  thing  material 
that  was  passing  in  the  city  of  New-York  7  But  Mr.  Da- 
vis says,  "  he  was  absent  on  official  business."  This  Mr. 
D.  does  not  affirm  from  his  own  knowledge;  and  as  he 
does  not,  it  is  fair  to  inquire  where  Col.  Burr  was,  and 
what  was  that  official  business  which  kept  him  for  months 
out  of  the  city  of  New-York  1  In  page  288,  Mr.  Davis 
assigns  as  a  reason  why  Mr.  Burr  accepted  the  oflEice  of 
Attorney  General,  "  that  the  seat  of  government  was  in 
New-York,  and  Mr.  Burr's  ofl&cial  business  seldom  requi- 
red his  absence  from  home."  On  the  whole,  I  think  it 
preposterous  to  suppose  that  Col.  Burr  was  not  consulted, 
or  that  he  did  not  in  fact  consent  to  these  sales.  If  he 
did  not  appear  personally  at  the  board  at  the  time  when 
any  question  was  formally  decided,  it  was  in  accordance 


1791.1  OF    NEW- YORK.  61 

"with  that  extreme   caution  and  wariness  which  always 
governed  his  public  conduct. 

After  a  very  long  and  acrimonious  discussion  of  Col. 
Talbot's  resolutions,  they  were  finally  rejected,  and  on  the 
10th  of  April,  Mr.  Melancton  Smith,  as  pure  a  man  as 
ever  lived,  introduced  a  resolution  approving  of  the  con- 
duct of  the  commissioners^  which  was  adopted  in  the  as- 
sembly by  a  vote  of  thirty-five  to  twenty. 


62  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1792. 


CHAPTER    III. 

FKOM  THE  GENERAL  STATE  ELECTION  IN  1792,  TO  MAY  1,  1796. 

The  election  of  governor  in  April,  1792,  was  conduct- 
ed with  much  zeal,  and  called  out,  in  every  county  in  the 
state,  the  most  rancorous  criminations  and  recriminations. 
The  state  canvassers  who  met  on  the  second  Tuesday  in 
June,  1792,  declared  George  Clinton  duly  elected  go- 
vernor by  a  majority  of  one  hundred  and  eight  votes. 
But  the  close  of  the  election  in  this  instance,  proved  to 
be  the  beginning  of  evils,  growing  out  of  party  collisions. 
I  By  the  laws  of  this  state,  from  the  organization  of  its 
government  down  to  and  subsequent  to  the  period  of 
which  I  am  now  writing,  the  votes  for  governor,  lieuten- 
ant governor,  and  senators,  were  canvassed  by  a  joint 
committee  of  the  two  houses  of  the  legislature.  This 
committee  consisted  of  twelve  persons,  six  of  w^hom  were 
chosen  by  each  house.  The  ballots  taken  in  each  town, 
were  by  law  required  to  be  delivered  to  the  sheriffs  of  the 
respective  counties,  w^hose  duty  it  was  to  put  them  into  a 
box  and  transmit  them  to  the  secretary  of  state,  who  was 
required  to  deliver  the  boxes  containing  the  ballots  to  the 
canvassing  committee,  who  were  to  count  them,  and  de- 
clare what  candidates  were  elected.  The  decision  of  the 
canvassers  was  declared  by  the  statute  to  be  final  and  con- 
clusive. By  the  constitution,  article  12,  in  connexion 
with  article  9,  the  senate  are  constituted  judges  of  their 
own  members.  The  colonial  assemblies  had  always  ex- 
ercised the  right  of  judging  whether  their  members  were 
duly  elected,  a  right  which  seems  to  me  inherent  in  all 
representative  bodies.  It,  therefore,  seems  to  follow,  that 
when  the  legislature  enacted  a  law  that  the  decision  of  the 


1792.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  63 

canvassers  was  conclusive  as  respected  the  election  of  sena 
tors,  they  exceeded  their  powersj  but  as  the  constitution 
had  not  designated  the  persons  who  were  to  decide  on  the 
evidence  of  the  election  of  a  governor,  the  legislature  had 
of  course  the  right,  and  it  was  their  duty  to  provide  by 
law  for  their  appointment.  These  remarks  will  be  found 
to  have  a  bearing  on  the  controversy,  the  history  of  which 
I  am  about  to  relate. 

The  acting  canvassers  this  year,  were  David  Gelston, 
Thomas  Tillotson,  Melancton  Smith,  Daniel  Graham,  P. 
Van  Cortland  Jr.,  David  McCarty,  Jonathan  N.  Havens, 
Samuel  Jones,  Isaac  Rosevelt,  Leonard  Ganesvoort,  and 
Joshua  Sands.  These  gentlemen  differed  in  opinion  as  to 
the  right  of  canvassing  and  allowing  the  votes  given  in 
the  counties  of  Otsego,  Clinton,  and  Tioga,  the  seven  first 
named  being  for  rejecting,  and  Messrs.  Jones,  Rosevelt, 
Ganesvoort,  and  Sands,  being  for  allowing  them.  The 
question  was  vitally  important,  because  it  was  generally 
admitted  that  the  county  of  Otsego  had  given  about  four 
hundred  majority  for  Mr.  Jay,  and  that  Clinton  and 
Tioga  would  not  materially  diminish  that  majority.  If, 
therefore,  the  votes  from  these  counties  were  counted  and 
allowed,  Mr.  Jay  was  elected;  if  rejected,  Mr.  Clinton 
was  the  successful  candidate. 

After  considerable  discussion,  the  canvassers  agreed  to 
request  the  opinion  of  Rufus  King  and  Aaron  Burr,  the 
two  state  senators,  and  both  of  them  eminent  lawyers. 
The  facts  in  the  case  are  so  clearly  and  distinctly  stated 
by  the  committee  in  their  communication  to  Messrs.  King 
and  Burr,  that  I  cannot  better  present  them  to  the  reader 
than  by  transcribing  that  statement. 

The  canvassers  commence  by  stating  the  facts  in  relation 
to  the  Otsego  votes.  They  say  that  "  by  the  twenty-sixth 
section  of  the  constitution  of  the  state  of  New- York,  it  is 
ordained  that  sheriffs  and  coroners  be  annually  appointed, 


64  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1792. 

and  that  no  person  shall  be  capable  of  holding  either  of 
the  said  offices  for  more  than  four  years  successively,  nor 
the  sheriff  of  holding  any  other  office  at  the  same  time. 
By  the  ninth  section  of  the  act  for  regulating  elections,  it 
is  enacted  that  one  of  the  inspectors  shall  deliver  the  bal- 
lots and  poll-lists,  sealed  up,  to  the  sherijQf  of  the  county; 
and,  by  the  tenth  section  of  the  said  act,  it  is  further  enact- 
ed, that  each  and  every  sheriff  of  the  respective  counties 
in  this  state,  shall,  upon  recei%dng  the  said  enclosures, 
directed  to  be  delivered  to  him  as  aforesaid,  without  open- 
ing or  inspecting  the  same,  or  any  or  either  of  them,  put 
the  said  enclosures,  and  every  one  of  them,  into  one  box, 
which  shall  be  well  closed  and  sealed  by  him,  under  his 
hand  and  seal,  with  the  name  of  his  county  written  on  the 
box,  and  be  delivered  by  him  into  the  office  of  the  secre- 
tary of  this  state,  where  the  same  shall  be  safely  kept  by 
the  secretary  or  his  deputy.  By  the  eleventh  section  of 
the  said  act,  all  questions  arising  on  the  canvass  and  esti- 
mate of  the  votes,  or  on  any  of  the  proceedings  therein, 
shall  be  determined  by  a  majority  of  the  members  of  the 
joint  committee  attending;  and  their  judgment  shall  be 
final,  and  the  oath  of  the  canvassers  requires  them  faith- 
fully, honestly,  and  impartially  to  canvass  and  estimate 
the  votes  contained  in  the  boxes  delivered  into  the  office 
of  the  secretary  of  this  state  by  the  sheriffs  of  the  several 
counties. 

"  On  the  17th  of  February,  1791,  Richard  R.  Smith 
was  appointed  sheriff  of  the  county  of  Otsego,  and  his 
commission  gives  him  the  custody  of  that  county  until  the 
18th  of  February,  1792.  On  the  13th  of  January,  1792, 
he  writes  a  letter  to  the  council  of  appointment,  inform- 
ing them  that,  as  the  year  for  which  he  was  appointed 
had  nearly  elapsed,  he  should  decline  a  re-appointment. 

"  On  the  30th  of  March,  1792,  the  council  of  appoint- 
ment appointed  Benjamin  Gilbert  to  the  office  of  sheriff  of 


1792.]  OF    NEW-YOKK  65 

the  said  county,  with  a  commission,  in  the  usual  form,  to 
keep  the  county  until  the  17th  of  February  next.  His 
commission  was  delivered  to  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer,  Esq. 
on  the  13th  of  April  last,  to  be  forwarded  by  him  to  the 
said  Benjamin  Gilbert.  By  the  affidavit  of  the  said  Ben- 
jamin Gilbert,  herewith  delivered,  it  appears  that  he  quali- 
fied into  the  office  of  sheriff  on  the  11th  day  of  May, 
1792.  On  the  first  Tuesday  in  April,  1792,  Richard  R. 
Smith  was  elected  supervisor  of  the  town  of  Otsego,  in 
said  county,  and  on  the  first  Tuesday  in  May,  took  his 
seat  at  the  board  of  supervisors,  and  assisted  in  the  ap- 
pointment of  loan  officers  for  the  county  of  Otsego.  By 
the  affidavit  of  Richard  R.  Smith,  herewith  delivered,  it 
appears  that  the  ballots  taken  in  the  county  of  Otsego 
were  delivered  to  him  as  sheriff,  and  by  him  enclosed  in  a 
sufficient  box,  on  or  about  the  3d  of  May,  which  box  he 
then  delivered  into  the  hands  of  Leonard  Goes,  a  person 
specially  deputed  by  him  for  the  purpose  of  delivering  the 
said  box  into  the  hands  of  the  secretary  of  this  state,  which 
was  accordingly  done,  as  appears  by  information  from  the 
secretary. 

"  A  small  bundle  of  papers,  enclosed  and  sealed,  was 
delivered  to  the  secretary  wuth  the  box,  on  which  is  writ- 
ten, 'The  votes  of  the  town  of  Cherry  Valley,  in  the 
county  of  Otsego.  Richard  R.  Smith,  sheriff.'  Several 
affidavits,  herewith  delivered,  state  certain  facts  respect- 
ing this  separate  bundle,  said  to  be  the  votes  of  Cherry 
Valley. 

"  On  this  case  arise  the  following  questions: 

"  1.  Was  Richard  R.  Smith  the  sheriff  of  the  county 
of  Otsego  when  he  received  and  forwarded  the  ballots  by 
his  special  deputy  1 

"  2.  If  he  was  not  sheriff,  can  the  votes  sent  by  him  be 
legally  canvassed? 

5 


66  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1792. 

"  3.  Can  the  joint  committee  canvass  the  votes  when 
sent  to  them  in  two  parcels,  the  one  contained  in  a  box, 
and  the  other  contained  in  a  paper,  or  separate  bundle? 
Or, 

"  4.  Ought  they  to  canvass  those  sealed  in  the  box,  and 
reject  the  others? 

"  Tioga. — It  appears  that  the  sheriff  of  Tioga  delivered 
the  box  containing  the  ballots  to  B.  Hovey,  his  special 
deputy,  who  set  out,  was  taken  sick  on  his  journey,  and 
delivered  the  box  to  H.  Thompson,  his  clerk,  who  de- 
livered it  into  the  secretary's  office. 

"  Question.  Ought  the  votes  of  Tioga  to  be  canvass- 
ed 1 

"  Clintox. — It  appears  that  the  sheriff  of  Clinton  de- 
livered the  box  containing  the  ballots  to  Theodorus  Piatt, 
Esq.,  who  had  no  deputation,  but  who  delivered  them  into 
the  secretary's  office,  as  appears  by  his  affidavit. 

"  Question.  Ought  the  votes  of  Clinton  to  be  canvass- 
ed 1" 

Upon  this  statement  of  the  case,  Mr.  King's  opinion 
was  that  inasmuch  as  the  term  of  four  years  had  not  ex- 
pired from  the  time  of  Smith's  appointment,  and  his  suc- 
cessor had  not  taken  possession  of  the  office,  he  was 
legally  sheriff  of  the  county  of  Otsego  at  the  time  the  votes 
were  forwarded. 

2.  If  he  was  not  legally  sheriff,  he  was  sheriff  in  fact, 
and  though  such  acts  of  an  officer  de  facto  as  are  volun- 
tarily and  exclusively  beneficial  to  himself  are  void,  yet 
such  acts  as  tend  to  the  public  utility  are  valid. 

3.  The  votes  from  Cherry  Valley,  which  were  put  into 
the  box  ought  to  be  canvassed  but  not  those  attached  to 
the  outside  of  it. 

4.  The  votes  from  Clinton  ought  to  be  canvassed,  be- 
cause a  sheriff  may  deputize  by  parol. 


s 


1792.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  67 

5.  The  votes  of  Tioga  ought  to  be  canvassed,  although 
it  is  doubtful  whether  a  deputy  of  a  sheriff  can  make  a 
deputy,  yet  the  election  law  ought  to  be  construed  libe- 
rally, and  in  furtherance  of  the  right  of  suffrage. 

Col.  Burr's  opinion  was, 

1.  That  the  Otsego  votes  ought  to  be  rejected.  Be- 
cause, the  right  of  a  sheriff  to  hold  over,  was  in  England, 
created  by  statute,  which  was  evidence  that  at  com- 
mon law  the  right  did  not  exist.  In  New-York,  there  is 
no  statute  authorizing  the  sheriff  to  exercise  the  functions 
of  his  office  after  his  term  expires ;  therefore  the  com- 
mon law  is  the  law  of  the  state,  and  by  it  the  sheriff, 
when  his  term  expires,  ceases  officially  to  exist. 

2.  The  facts  show  that  Smith  was  not  sheriff  de  facto. 
With  respect   to    the  ballots   of  Clinton  county,   Mr. 

Burr  said  that  verbal  and  written  deputations  by  a  sheriff 
to  perform  a  single  ministerial  act,  are  of  equal  validity. 
I  therefore  infer  that  he  was  of  opinion  that  the  votes 
from  this  county  ought  to  be  allowed. 

As  to  the  Tioga  votes,  Mr.  B.  declared  it  as  his  opi 
nion,  that  a  deputy  sheriff  could  not  authorize  a  special 
deputy  to  perforn  so  important  a  trust  as  that  of  taking 
charge  of  the  ballots  of  a  county,  and  he  therefore 
thought  that  the  votes  from  Tioga  could  not  be  adjudged 
to  have  been  delivered  by  the  sheriff  to  the  secretary. 
The  opinions  of  Mr.  King  and  Mr.  Burr,  are  given  in 
extenso  by  Mr.  Davis,  in  the  first  volume  of  his  Memoirs 
of  Col.  Burr,  page  336,  to  which  the  reader  is  referred. 

A  majority  of  the  canvassers,  namely,  Messrs.  Gellston 
Tillotson,  Smith,  Graham,  Van  Cortland,  M'Carty  and  Ha- 
vens finally  decided  on  rejecting  the  votes  from  the  three 
counties.  Against  this  decision  Messrs.  Jones,  Rosevelt 
and  Gansevoort  protested  jointly,  and  Mr.  Sands  separate- 
ly, and  caused  their  protest  to  be  entered  on  the  minutes 
of  the  proceedings  of  the  committee. 


68  POLITICAL    HISTOKY  [1792. 

To  my  mind,  the  reasons  assigned  by  Mr.  King  and  by 
the  minority  of  the  committee  in  their  protest,  are  strong 
and  convincing.  I  think  Richard  R.  Smith,  if  not  de 
jure  was  de  facto  sheriff,  and  that  his  acts  as  such  in  this 
case  were  valid.  It  would  be  preposterous  to  assume  that 
the  law  of  this  state,  as  it  then  existed,  could  have  been 
fairly  construed,  that  whenever  from  insanity,  sudden 
death,  or  any  other  cause,  the  new  sheriff,  after  he  receiv- 
ed his  commission,  did  not  qualify  himself  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  his  office,  by  the  very  day  the  term  of  office 
of  the  old  sheriff  expired,  that  in  such  case  the  county 
was  without  a  sheriff.  That  no  such  construction  had 
been  recognized,  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  the  settled  usage 
and  practice  had  long  been  that  the  old  sheriff  held  until 
the  new  one  actually  took  possession  of  the  office.  I 
also  think  that  the  verbal  deputation  by  the  sheriff  of 
Clinton  to  Mr.  Piatt  was  competent,  and  that  the  deputy 
sheriff  of  Tioga  had  a  right  to  depute  a  person  to  carry 
the  votes  of  that  county  to  the  secretary  of  state,  and  in 
this  position  I  am  sustained  by  the  opinion  of  the  New- 
York  supreme  court.*  But  I  have  another  reason  for  be- 
lieving that  the  canvassers  ought  not  to  have  rejected 
these  votes.  The  right  of  suffrage  is  a  sacred  and  inva- 
luable right  which  belongs  to  the  elector,  and  of  which 
he  cannot  be  divested.  When  he  has  deposited  his  vote 
in  the  ballot  box,  he  has  exercised  that  right.  And  he 
ought  not  and  cannot  be  deprived  of  the  effect  of  it,  either 
by  the  non-feasance  or  misfeasance  of  the  agent  to  whom 
the  law  commits  the  custody  and  care  of  his  ballot.  If 
it  be  in  existence  at  the  time  of  the  canvass,  whatever 
may  have  been  the  negligence  or  misconduct  of  the  agent 


*  In  the  case  of  Hunt  vs.  Burrill,  5  John.  R.  137,  the  court  expressly  decide  that 
a  deputy  sheriff  may  depute  another  to  do  a  particular  act,  and  the  same  doctrine 
■was  held  in  England  so  early  as  the  time  of  Lord  Holt.  1  Salkeld  95,  Parker 
*»  Kelt. 


1792.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  C9 

who  was  charged  with  the  keeping  of  it,  the  persons  who 
adjudicate  upon  the  election  of  the  candidate  are  bound 
to  allow  it.  If  it  be  lost  or  destroyed,  and  that  vote 
would  have  changed  the  result,  in  such  case  a  new  elec- 
tion ought  to  be  directed.  The  United  States  house  of 
representatives  have  long  since  established  the  rule  that 
the  intention  of  the  voter,  when  it  can  be  ascertained, 
shall  be  fully  carried  into  effect.  It  was  in  accordance 
with  this  principle,  that  they  decided  the  case  of  Isaac 
Williams,  Jr.,  and  John  M.  Bowers  in  the  year  1813. 

But  what  could  Mr.  Clinton  do  ?  He  was  declared 
governor  by  the  only  tribunal  which  had  a  right  to  speak 
on  the  subject.  If  he  declined  acting,  the  state  for  the 
time  being  would  be  without  an  executive  department, 
elected  by  the  freeholders  ;  for  Mr.  Van  Cortland  was  in 
the  same  position  with  him  as  respected  the  result  of  the 
election.  It  seems  to  me  he  was  right  in  acting  upon  the 
assumption,  that  the  decision  of  the  canvassers  was  correct. 
Still  I  cannot  think  he  ought  to  be  exonerated  from  all 
blame.  He  must  have  been  apprised  of  the  state  of  the 
case,  before  the  canvassers  decided — as  time  was  taken  by 
them  to  consult  counsel  and  obtain  their  written  opinions. 
Ought  not  Gov.  Clinton  to  have  volunteered  his  advice  to 
them  ■?  And  if  he  had  advised  them  to  allow  the  disputed 
votes,  is  it  probable  that  a  majority  of  the  committee  being 
his  personal  and  political  friends,  would  have  rejected 
them  1  The  excitement  produced  by  a  heated  and  sharply 
contested  election,  in  the  result  of  which  he  was  personal- 
ly concerned,  must  have  biassed  and  clouded  the  otherwise 
clear  and  pure  mind  of  the  governor.  But  how  easy  is  it 
for  us  to  persuade  ourselves  that  what  we  ardently  wish 
should  be  done,  it  is  right  that  it  should  be  done  1  How 
hard  is  it  for  the  most  pure  minded  man  to  adjudicate 
upon  a  question  against  his  own  wishes  and  interest  ? 
Besides  this,  the  governor  would  have  had  to  contend,  and 


70  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1792. 

did  have  to  contend,  not  only  against  his  own  interest  and 
wishes,  but  against  the  persuasions  and  wishes  of  all 
those  political  friends  who  had  steadily  and  zealously  sup- 
ported him,  and  whose  political  prospects  greatly  depend- 
ed on  the  decision  of  the  canvassers.  Considering  there- 
fore, the  strength  of  party  excitement,  and  the  weakness 
of  human  nature,  it  is  not  surprising  that  Mr.  Clinton 
should  have  desired  that  the  canvassing  committee  should 
decide  the  election  in  his  favor. 

The  senators  elected  this  year  from  the  southern  dis- 
trict, were  Henry  Cruger,  Joshua  Sands,  and  Selah  Strong, 
all  federalists;  from  the  middle,  Joseph  Hasbrouck,  re- 
publican; from  the  western,  John  Frey,  in  lieu  of  Peter 
Schuyler  deceased,  federal;  and  from  the  eastern,  Robert 
Woodworth  and  John  Livingston,  republican. 

Upon  the  annunciation  of  the  decision  of  the  canvassers, 
great  excitement  was  manifested  on  the  part  of  the  fede- 
ralists in  every  county  in  the  state.  Public  meetings 
were  held,  and  the  governor  was  denounced  as  an  usurper, 
and  the  canvassing  committee  as  corrupt.  Some  of  the 
public  meetings  protested  against  the  legality  of  the  acts 
of  Mr.  Clinton  as  governor;  and  the  state  seemed  mena- 
ced with  the  ascendancy  of  anarchy  and  utter  confusion. 
In  this  state  of  the  public  mind,  it  is  consoling  as  well  as 
gratifying  to  refer  to  the  conduct  of  John  Jay.  When 
the  canvassers  decided,  he  was  holding  a  circuit  court  at 
Bennington  in  Vermont.  On  his  return,  upon  entering 
the  borders  of  this  state,  his  political  friends  ran  together 
in  crowds  to  meet  him.  At  Lansingburgh,  Albany  and 
Hudson,  he  was  publicly  addressed;  and  when  he  arrived 
within  eight  miles  of  New-York,  he  was  met  by  a  body 
of  citizens  who  escorted  him  to  his  house  in  the  city. 
Some  of  their  addresses  to  him  on  this  occasion,  were 
highly  inflammatory  and  very  severe  upon  the  conduct, 
character  and  motives  of  the  friends  of  Gov.  Clinton.     At 


1792,]  OF    NEW-YORK.  71 

New- York,  immediately  after  his  arrival,  a  public  meet- 
ing of  "  the  friends  of  liberty"  was  held,  "  and  a  commit- 
tee was  appointed  to  congratulate  him  on  his  return,  and 
to  express  to  him  the  sentiments  of  the  inhabitants  on  the 
late  attempt  which  had  been  made  '  in  contempt  of  the 
sacred  voice  of  the  people,  in  defiance  of  the  constitution^ 
and  in  violation  of  the  uniform  practice  and  settled  prin- 
ciples of  lawj  to  deprive  him  of  the  high  office  to  which 
he  had  been  elected."  (1  Jay,  291.)  Amidst  these  ex- 
citing scenes,  Mr.  Jay's  deportment  was  calm  and  digni- 
fied; no  bitter  or  heated  expressions  escaped  him,  and  his 
replies  to  public  addresses  were  modest,  mild  and  concili- 
atory, tending  to  quiet  the  heated  feelings  of  his  friends, 
and  to  produce  not  only  a  respect  and  obedience  to  the 
laws,  but  harmony  and  good  feeling  in  society.  I  cannot 
on  this  occasion,  forbear  transcribing  a  sentence  from  his 
answer  to  the  address  of  his  New-York  friends,  not  only 
because  it  does  great  honor  to  this  pure  and  upright  man, 
but  because  it  is  a  sentiment  which  ought  to  be  cherished 
by  every  friend  to  social  happiness  and  the  stability  of  our 
civil  institutions.  "  Every  consideration,"  says  Chief 
Justice  Jay,  "  of  propriety,  forbids  that  difference  in  opi- 
nion respecting  candidates,  should  suspend  or  interrupt  that 
natural  good  humor  which  harmonizes  society  and  softens 
the  asperities  incident  to  human  life  and  human  affairs.". 
Governor  Clinton  took  the  oath  of  office  on  the  first  day 
of  July;  and  on  the  19th  of  that  month,  partook  of  a  pub- 
lic dinner  tendered  to  him  by  his  political  friends  in  New- 
York.  The  venerable  Samuel  Osgood,  then  late  post- 
master general,  as  chairman  of  a  committee  of  the  citizens, 
delivered  an  address  to  the  governor  alluding  to,  and  ani- 
madverting with  some  severity  on,  the  conduct  of  his  op- 
ponents; to  which  he  replied  in  a  conciliatory  but  dignified 
manner.  Some  of  the  regular  toasts  drank  at  this  dinner, 
may  afford  an  index  to  the  political  views  of  the  republi- 


72  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1792. 

can  party  in  New- York,  at  that  time.  The  company 
toasted J 

"  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States." 

"  General  Washington." 

"  Thomas  Jefferson." 

"  The  French  Republic." 

No  national  officer  or  member  of  the  United  States 
government  was  named  at  this  meeting,  but  Gen.  Wash- 
ington and  Mr.  Jefferson. 

It  may  be  proper  here  to  remark,  that  when  the  French 
revolution  first  commenced,  and  indeed  after  it  had  pro- 
gressed for  a  considerable  time,  there  was  in  America  but 
one  feeling  and  one  view  in  relation  to  it.  All  rejoiced 
that  any  people,  and  especially  a  people  to  whose  aid  the 
United  States,  in  their  struggle  for  independence,  were 
deeply  indebted,  had  thrown  off  the  shackles  of  tyranny 
and  resolved  to  be  freej  but  at  the  period  of  which  I  am 
now  writing,  many  of  the  American  politicians  began  to 
disapprove  of  the  outrages  committed  by  the  Jacobins  of 
France,  and  to  be  seriously  apprehensive  that,  considering 
the  good  feeling  so  universally  entertained  in  America 
towards  the  French  nation,  that  the  intrigues  of  the  latter, 
and  the  honest  sympathy  of  the  former,  might  involve  the 
American  republic  in  an  European  war.  These  appre- 
hensions carried  many  intelligent  men  so  far  that  they 
began  to  denounce  the  original  revolution  in  France.  Is 
there  not  reason  to  suspect  that  some  of  the  latter  class  of 
politicians  were  in  part  influenced  by  their  mercantile  and 
other  friends  in  Great  Britain  7  The  republican  party,  on 
the  other  hand,  advocated  with  great  warmth,  the  French 
revolution,  and  hailed  its  authors  as  friends  and  brothers. 
It  is  the  tendency  of  political  parties  to  magnify  their 
differences  on  all  theoretical  questions,  and  apparently  to 
diverge  wider  and  wider  from  each  other.  The  federalists 
accused  the  republicans  of  an  undue  attachment  to  France; 


1792.1  OF    NEW-YORK.  73 

and  affected  to  hold  them  responsible  for  all  the  wild  the- 
ories both  in  politics  and  religion,  which  at  times  appeared 
and  disappeared  in  France.  While  the  republicans  charged 
the  federalists  with  being  hostile  to  the  French  revolution, 
unreasonably  favorable  to  the  British  nation,  and  in  fact, 
unfriendly  not  only  to  liberty  and  freedom  in  France,  but 
in  this  country.  At  the  time  the  dinner  was  given  to  the 
governor,  these  feelings  were  just  beginning  to  take  root 
in  the  minds  of  the  leaders  of  the  two  parties.  I  regret 
to  be  compelled  to  add,  that  they  sprung  up  and  continued 
to  grow  until  they  eventually  furnished  a  distinguishing 
characteristic  of  the  respective  parties. 

It  is  much  to  be  lamented  that  political  parties  should 
ever  be  based  on  a  difference  of  jopinion  about  the  merits 
or  demerits  of  a  foreign  nation.  Political  controversies 
of  this  description  tend  to  degrade  us  in  the  eyes  of 
foreigners,  to  create  the  most  bitter  animosities  at  home, 
and  to  extinguish  that  patriotic  ardor  so  essential  to  the 
independence,  and  I  may  add,  the  existence  of  a  free 
people. 

I  have  before  stated  the  reasons  why  the  appointment 
of  a  fourth  judge  of  the  supreme  court  was  deemed  ne- 
cessary, and  to  those  reasons  may  now  be  added  the  late 
creation  by  the  legislature  of  several  new  counties.  The 
council  in  view  of  all  the  circumstances,  determined  to 
appoint  a  fourth  judge,  and  by  the  casting  vote  of  the 
governor,  that  office  was  in  the  first  instance  offered  to 
Aaron  Burr.  He  hesitated  about  accepting  the  appoint- 
ment, but  inasmuch  as  the  acceptance  of  that  office  would 
render  it  necessary  for  him  to  resign  his  seat  in  the  senate 
of  the  United  States,  he  finally  concluded  to  decline 
receiving  the  office  of  judge.  After  Col.  Burr  had  de- 
clined, Morgan  Lewis,  the  attorney  general,  was  appoint- 
ed and  Nathaniel  Lawrence  was  created  attorney  general 
in  the  place  of  Mr.  Lewis.     These  appointments  were 


74  POLITICAL     HISTORY  ''179-2^ 

all  made  by  the  votes  of  Messrs.  Pye  and  Van  Cortland, 
and  the  casting  vote  of  the  governor. 

On  the  sixth  of  November,  the  legislature  met  in  New- 
York,  and  Mr.  Watts  was  again  without  opposition,  elected 
speaker.  The  governor's  speech  was  very  concise.  He 
stated  that  the  reason  why  the  session  had  been  appointed  so 
early,  was,  in  order  that  a  choice  of  electors  for  president 
and  vice-president  of  the  United  States,  might  be  made  in 
due  time;  and  he  urged  their  immediate  attention  to  that 
subject,  and  suggested  the  propriety  of  an  early  despatch 
of  other  public  business,  so  as  to  render  the  session  as 
short  as  possible.  It  may  be  that  this  suggestion  was 
made  in  anticipation  of  the  tedious  investigation  and  in- 
terminable acrimonious  disputes  in  which,  notwithstand- 
ing that  suggestion,  the  two  houses  soon  afterwards  be- 
came engaged,  in  relation  to  the  conduct  of  the  canvassing 
committee.  In  the  senate,  the  canvassing  question  was 
immediately  raised,  by  an  objection  made  by  the  federal 
ists  in  that  body,  to  the  right  of  John  Livingston,  whom 
the  canvassers  had  declared  duly  elected  a  senator  from 
the  eastern  district.  That  district  included  the  county  of 
Clinton.  Thomas  Jenkins  was  ftie  opposing  candidate  to 
Mr.  Livingston;  and  if  all  the  votes  in  Clinton  county  had 
been  given  for  Mr.  Thos.  Jenkins,  he  would  have  been 
elected.  As  there  was  a  legal  possibility  that  all  the 
votes  were  so  given,  it  was  urged  that  if  those  votes  were 
improperly  rejected,  Mr.  Livingston  was  not  entitled  to 
his  seat,  and  that  a  new  election  ought  to  be  directed. 
The  federalists,  therefore,  contended  that  it  was  the  duty 
of  the  senate  to  review  the  decision  of  the  canvassers.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  was  urged  that  the  decision  of  the  can- 
vassers was  final  and  conclusive,  even  on  the  senate. 

This  question  was  decided  in  favor  of  the  right  of  Mr. 
Livingston  to  his  seat,  by  the  following  vote  : — In  the 
affirmative,  Williams,  Swartwout,  Van  Cortland,  Gels- 


1792.1  ^^   NEW-YORK.  75 

ton,  Schenck,  Woodworth,  Hasbrouck,  Webster,  Pye, 
Tillotson,  Cantine,  Carpenter.  Negative,  Frey,  Schuy- 
ler, Van  Rensselaer,  Sands,  P.  Ganesvoort,  Jones,  Duow, 
Cruger,  Strong,  Powers.  For  the  affirmative,  12 — nega- 
tive, 11.  This  vote  shows  the  strength  of  the  parties  in 
the  senate,  which  it  will  be  perceived,  was  unusually 
full.  After  Mr.  J.  Livingston  had  taken  his  seat,  there 
was  a  republican  majority  of  two.  Mr.  Williams  of 
Washington  county,  seems  to  have  been  the  most  active 
on  the  democratic  side  ;  and  Mr.  Jones,  who  it  will  be 
perceived,  had  changed  from  being  a  zealous  anti-fede- 
ralist, to  an  equally  zealous  federalist,  was  the  most  effi- 
cient member  in  the  opposition.  He  with  several  other 
senators,  caused  a  protest  to  be  entered  on  the  journals, 
in  which  they  insist  with  great  force,  that  the  senate  are 
by  a  right,  secured  by  the  constitution,  of  which  they 
could  not  be  deprived  by  any  law  passed  by  the  legisla- 
ture, the  judges  of  their  own  members,  and  whether  they 
were  duly  elected.* 

*  This  able  lawyer  and  useful  legislator,  it  is  said,  was  a  little  inclined  to 
what  is  called  trimming  in  politics.  A  mariner,  if  he  has  sea-room  enough,  will 
sail  with  great  ease,  provided  he  will  shift  his  sails  every  time  the  wind  clKinges, 
so  that  his  vessel  may  be  constantly  running  before  the  wind  ;  and  therefore  in  an 
elective  government,  the  politician  who  tacks  and  trims  his  sails  on  all  occasions 
so  as  to  catch  the  popular  gale,  is  very  appropriately  called  a  trimmer.  As  Mr. 
Jones  was  generally  found  acting  with  the  majority  of  the  southern  district,  it  i- 
not  surprising  that  he  acquired  something  of  the  character  of  a  time  server. 
Though  he  by  no  means  deserved  it,  for  on  all  questions  of  principle,  he  was  deci- 
ded, firm,  and  unyielding.  But  he  was  a  kind-hearted,  social,  companionable 
man;  and  not  only  devised,  but  undoubtedly  did  much  to  advance  the  real  pros- 
perity of  the  community.  There  is  so  much  frankness  and  good  nature  evinced  by 
the  following  anecdote  related  of  him  by  the  late  "Thief  Justice  Spencer,  that  I  can. 
not  refrain  from  inserting  it.  While  Judge  Spencer  was  a  state  senator  with  Mr. 
Jones,  he  said  to  him  one  day  in  a  jocular  manner,  "how  is  this,  Mr.  Jones,  the 
majority  in  the  southern  district  frequently  changes ;  at  one  time  it  is  federal, 
then  it  is  republican;  but  whether  the  one  or  the  other  party  have  the  majority, 
you  always  get  your  election.  Pray  acquaint  me  with  the  means  you  use,  wliich 
secures  yousuch  constant  success'"  "  Why,  Spancer,"  said  Jones,  (his  pronun- 
ciation was  broad,)  ''  to  tell  you  the  truth,  icAen  my  troops  wo'nt  follow  mc,  1  fol- 
low them."  The  fact  was,  Mr.  Jones  while  a  member  of  the  convention  at  Pough- 
keepsie  which  adopted  the  constitution,  became  in  principle,  separated  from 
Gov.  Clinton,  he  being  in  favor,  and  the  governor  being  opposed  to  that  instru- 
ment; but  Mr.  J.  continued  to  be  ranked  among  the  supporters  of  Ciinton,  until 
the  election  in  April  1792,  and  the  contest  in  relation  to  the  canvassing  committee. 


76  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1792. 

On  the  13th  of  November,  about  eighty  men,  caUing 
themselves  deputies,  from  various  parts  of  the  state,  ap- 
peared in  New- York  "  to  solicit,"  as  they  alledged,  "  a 
legislative  remedy  for  the  late  outrage  said  to  have  been 
committed  on  the  right  of  suffrage  by  a  majority  of  the 
canvassing  committee."  They  were  introduced  to  the 
bar  of  the  assembly  with  great  formality  and  solemnity 
by  Mr.  J.  O.  Hoffman,  who  presented  their  memorial. 
It  was  referred  to  a  committee  of  the  whole  house ;  and 
ten  days  afterwards,  the  assembly  went  into  committee 
on  that  subject.  A  great  number  of  witnesses  were 
sworn,  and  their  depositions  are  entered  at  length  on  the 
journals.  Mr.  Hoffman  and  Mr.  James  Kent  were  the 
principal  managers  on  the  part  of  the  memorialists.  It 
soon  appeared  very  evident  that  there  was  a  decided 
majority  opposed  to  any  legislative  action  on  the  sub- 
ject; but  the  investigation  was  pursued  with  great 
eagerness  on  the  part  of  the  federalists,  probably  in  order 
to  keep  up  and  increase  the  popular  excitement  against 
the  governor  and  his  political  friends.  The  disputes 
about  the  formality  of  the  proceedings  and  the  proper 
questions  to  be  put  to  witnesses,  together  with  the  sub- 
ject matter  of  the  complaint,  seemed  to  furnish  never 
ending  topics  of  discussion. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  friends  of  Gov.  Clinton,  intro- 
duced a  memorial  against  William  Cooper,  first  judge  of 
Otsego  county,  setting  forth  facts  on  which  the  memo- 
rialists alledged  that  an  impeachment  might  be  founded 
and  prosecuted  by  the  house  against  him.  In  support 
of  the  charges,  a  vast  number  of  witnesses  were  sworn 
for  and  against  Judge  Cooper.  The  depositions  of  these 
witnesses,  so  far  as  I  have  examined  them,  do  not  go  to 
prove  any  palpable  misconduct  in  Mr.  Cooper  in  the  dis- 
charge of  his  duty  as  a  judge,  or  any  illegal  or  corrupt 
acts  done  under  color  of  his  office ;  but  they  certainly 


1792.]  OP   NEW-YORK.  77 

do  show  gross  misconduct  in  him  as  a  citizen,  during  the 
canvass  in  Otsego,  at  the  election  between  Jay  and  Clin- 
ton. It  was  deposed  that  he  encouraged  illegal  voting 
in  favor  of  Mr.  Jay;  that  he  knowingly  had  caused  men 
to  vote  who  were  not  freeholders ;  that  he  threatened 
voters  with  suits  who  expressed  a  wish  to  vote  for  Mr. 
Clinton,  and  that  he  menaced  a  Mr.  Cannon,  who  came 
to  the  polls  to  challenge  illegal  voters,  that  if  he  chal- 
lenged any  one,  he  (the  judge,)  would  forthwith  commit 
him  to  jail.  It  must,  however,  very  soon  have  been 
evident  that  nothing  could  be  proved  against  Judge 
Cooper,  on  which  an  impeachment  could  be  founded. 
Still  the  investigation  was  pursued,  and  indeed  was  not 
disposed  of  during  that  long  session,  which  continued 
through  the  winter,  and  I  believe  ran  into  the  spring  of 
1793.  For  my  part,  I  regard  this  legislature  as  spend- 
ing the  greater  part  of  several  months  for  the  sole  pur- 
pose of  playing  a  political  game.  The  federalists  had 
instituted  an  investigation  into  the  conduct  of  the  can- 
vassing committee  ;  not  with  a  view  of  inducing  any 
legislative  action,  (for  I  do  not  believe  that  such 
men  as  James  Kent  and  many  other  federal  members 
would,  if  they  had  had  the  power,  have  ventured  at  that 
time,  by  legislative  enactments,  to  have  declared  the 
election  of  Gov.  Clinton,  void,)  but  for  the  purpose  of 
rendering  the  governor  odious,  in  consequence  of  the 
rejection  of  the  Otsego  votes.  As  a  sort  of  an  offset  or 
countermine,  I  suppose  the  democratic  party  got  up  the 
proceedings  against  judge  Cooper  with  a  view  to  turn 
the  attention  of  the  public  from  the  proceedings  of  the 
convassers,  to  the  improper  conduct  of  the  leader  of  the 
Jay  party  in  Otsego,  and  the  illegal  votes  which  were 
there  given  for  Mr.  Jay.  The  assembly  finally  decided 
in  favor  of  the  proceedings  of  the  majority  of  the  can- 
vassers. 


78  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1793. 

The  Presidential  electors  cliosen  at  this  session  were 
John  Woodhull,  Edward  Savage,  Johanus  Brown,  Wil- 
liam Floyd,  Abraham  Ten  Eyck,  David  Van  Ness,  Sam- 
uel Clark,  Abraham  Yates,  Jr.,  Volkert  Veeder,  Samuel 
Ward  and  Samuel  Osgood,  all  I  believe  republicans. 
They  were  nominated  by  ballot  in  each  house,  and  the 
successful  candidates  were  nominated  on  the  first  ballot. 
This  is  a  very  decisive  proof  that  there  was  a  decided 
republican  majority  in  both  houses. 

The  election  in  April,  1793,  resulted  in  a  triumphant 
federal  majority — the  southern,  eastern  and  western  dis- 
tricts returned  federal  senators.  From  the  southern  dis- 
trict Ezra  L'Hommedieu  and  Matthew  Clarkson  were 
chosen,  in  the  eastern  district;  Zina  Hitchcock  was  elect- 
ed by  about  three  hundred  majority  over  Edward  Savage, 
and  in  the  w^estern.  Jacobus  Van  Schoonhoven  and  Mi- 
chael Myers  were  elected  by  more  than  sixteen  hundred 
majority.  It  was  in  the  middle  district  only,  where  the 
republican  senatorial  ticket  succeeded  by  the  election 
of  John  Cantine  and  Reuben  Hopkins. 

During  tlie  summer  of  1793,  Mr.  Genett,  wdio  had 
lately  arrived  in  the  United  States  in  quality  of  minis- 
ter of  tlie  French  Republic,  visited  New-York.  He 
was  received  by  the  republicans  of  that  city  with  the 
most  cordial  greetings.  A  committee  was  appointed,  of 
which  James  Nicholson  was  chairman,  who  in  behalf  of 
the  republicans  of  New-York,  made  an  address  to  him 
expressive  of  great  sympathy  for  the  French  people,  and 
highly  complimentary  to  the  minister.  The  federalists 
of  New-York  thereupon  held  a  meeting  and  adopted  and 
published  spirited  resolutions  in  support  of  the  neutral 
attitude  assumed  by  the  United  States  government,  as 
respected  the  belligerent  nations  of  Europe. 

The  legislature  met  at  Albany  on  the  7th  of  January, 
1794.     Jas.  Watson  of  New-York  was  chosen  speaker. 


1 


1794.]  OP  Ni:w-YORK.  79 

The  governor  in  his  address  to  the  two  houses,  made 
some  general  remarks  in  relation  to  the  war  in  Europe. 
He  expressed  a  wish  for  the  preservation  of  peace,  but 
complained  that  the  British  had  not  surrendered  the 
western  posts,  according  to  the  stipulation  contained  in 
the  treaty  of  1783  ;  and  he  animadverted  with  some 
severity  on  the  delay  of  Great  Britain  in  the  perform- 
ance of  that  part  of  the  treaty. 

At  that  time  our  criminal  code  was  much  more  san- 
guinary than  at  present.  Several  felonies  besides  that 
of. murder,  by  the  laws  then  existing,  were  punished 
with  death.  The  governor  recommended  a  revision 
and  amelioration  of  the  criminal  code.  He  urged  that 
the  certainty  rather  than  the  severity  of  punishment  was 
the  best  and  surest  means  of  preventing  crime,  and  he 
closed  his  address  with  recommending  union  and  harmo- 
ny, and  a  speedy  despatch  of  the  public  business.  I 
cannot  refrain  from  remarking,  that  the  speeches  of  Gov. 
Clinton  were  all  short,  an  example  which  it  were  to  be 
wished  his  successors  had  followed.  Gov.  Clinton's 
speech  on  this  occasion  will  be  found  excellent,  both 
in  manner  and  matter. 

In  a  few  minutes  after  the  governor  and  senate  with- 
drew from  the  assembly  chamber,  and  as  soon  as  the 
speaker  resumed  the  chair,  Mr.  Josiah  Ogden  Hoffman 
of  New- York,  moved  that  the  house  should  forthwith 
proceed  to  the  choice  of  a  council  of  appointment.  He 
delivered  a  most  violent  pliilipic  against  the  existing 
council,  and  urged  that  they  ought  to  be  immediately 
arrested  in  their  nefarious  course.  He  was  supported 
by  Mr.  Ambrose  Spencer,  who  that  session,  was  a  mem- 
ber of  the  assembly,  and  several  other  federal  members. 
The  motion  was  opposed  by  Mr.  Smith  of  Suffolk,  and 
Mr.  Comstock  of  Saratoga,  as  unusual  and  unprece- 
dented J  and  it  was  suggested  that  by  the  constitution, 


80  POLITICAL    HISTORY.  [1794. 

the  members  of  the  council  had  a  right  to  hold  their 
offices  for  one  year;  that  the  present  council  had  not 
been  in  office  a  year,  and  should  another  council  be 
that  evening  chosen,  the  present  council  would  have  a 
right  to  hold  their  offices  and  discharge  the  functions 
appertaining  to  the  council  of  appointment  until  a  year 
from  the  time  of  their  election  had  expired.  They 
finally  moved  that  the  further  consideration  of  the  motion 
should  be  postponed  until  the  next  morning. 

The  postponement  was  resisted  by  Mr.  Hoffman.  He 
alleged  that  the  appointment  of  a  fifth  judge  of  the 
supreme  court  had  become  necessary,  that  he  had  rea- 
son to  believe  that  if  that  officer  should  be  appointed 
by  the  present  council,  a  very  unsuitable  man  would  be 
selected — and  he  apprehended  that  unless  the  house 
immediately  elected  a  new  council,  the  mischief  would 
be  consummated  that  very  evening. 

The  existing  council,  it  will  be  remembered,  consist- 
ed of  Messrs.  Gelston,  Hasbrouck  and  Woodworth, 
republican,  and  Mr.  Frey,  a  federalist.  The  federal  par- 
ty desired  the  appointment  of  Egbert  Benson  to  the 
office  of  supreme  court  judge,  but  the  republicans  were 
generally  in  favor  of  Peter  W.  Yates,  and  Mr.  H.  knew 
at  any  rate,  that  the  majority  of  the  council  never 
would  consent  to  the  appointment  of  Mr.  Benson.  It 
is  said  Gov.  Clinton  doubted  the  propriety  of  adding 
another  judge  to  the  bench  of  the  supreme  court,  and 
that  the  republican  part  of  the  council  were  divided  in 
their  opinion  as  to  the  propriety  of  appointing  Mr. 
Yates.  I  find  an  entry  in  the  books  kept  by  the  coun- 
cil, at  a  meeting  held  some  time  before,  from  which  it 
appears,  that  the  subject  of  appointing  a  fifth  judge  was 
then  agitated;  that  the  council  were  divided,  two  of  the 
them  expressing  an  opinion  that  an  additional  judge 
was  unnecessary,  and  that  the  other  held  an  adverse 


1794.]  •  OP    NEW-YORK.  81 

opinion,  but  the  two  last  mentioned  councillors  could 
not  agree  on  the  person  who  ought  to  be  appointed.  It 
does  not  appear  that  the  governor  expressed  any  opin- 
ion ;  but  I  am  told  by  a  gentleman*  now  living,  of  great 
respectability,  who  is  a  son  of  one  of  the  members  of  the 
council,  that  the  governor  was  indisposed  to  the  ap- 
pointment of  Mr.  Yates,  but  at  the  same  time  he  wished 
to  avoid  a  direct  refusal  to  nominate  him,  because  such 
refusal  would  disafFect  some  of  his  best  friends.  Under 
these  circumstances,  it  strikes  me  that  the  hot  and 
indecent  haste  of  Mr.  Hoffman  and  his  friends,  was 
quite  unjustifiable,  it  being  most  evident  that  as  the 
majority  of  the  council  were  decided  political  friends 
of  the  governor,  had  he  been  desirious  that  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  judge  should  have  been  made  by  that  coun- 
cil, he  might  have  effected  it,  even  at  the  very  time  and 
while  Mr.  Hoffman  was  delivering  his  inflammatory 
speech  against  the  governor  and  council.  One  object  of 
Mr.  Hoffman,  hovrever,  might  have  been  to  continue  and 
increase  the  agitation  of  the  public  mind.  Mr.  Hoff- 
man's motion  was,  notwithstanding  the  vigorous  oppo- 
sition made  to  it,  adopted,  and  a  council  was  that  eve- 
ning chosen,  consisting  of  Philip  Schuyler,  Zina  Hitch- 
cock, Selah  Strong  and  Reuben  Hopkins,  the  three  first 
named  gentlemen  being  federalists.  Shortly  after  the 
creation  of  the  new  council,  Egbert  Eenson  was  appoint- 
ed a  judge  of  the  supreme  court. 

On  this  occasion  the  members  of  the  council,  for  the 
first  time,  so  far  as  I  can  ascertain,  claimed  and  exer- 
cised a  concurrent  right  with  the  governor,  to  the  nomi- 
nation of  officers.  Mr.  Clinton  having  refused  to  nom- 
nate  Mr.  Benson,  one  of  the  council  nominated  him, 
and  three  of  them  voting  for  him,  he  was  declared  duly 
appointed.     Gov.  Clinton  protested  against  this  proceed- 

*  The  Hon.  John  Woodworth. 

6 


k 


82  POLITICAL    HISTORY  •  [1794. 

ingj  insisting  that  the  exclusive  right  of  nomination  was 
vested  in  him  by  the  constitution. 

A  joint  resolution,  during  this  session,  passed  the 
assembly,  requiring  the  council  of  appointment  to  cause 
the  minutes  of  their  proceedings  to  be  published,  but  I 
cannot  find  that  it  passed  the  senate. 

A  bill  was  introduced  into  the  senate,  authorizing 
sheriffs  of  counties  to  hold  their  offices  respectively 
until  new  sheriff's  should  be  appointed  and  should  duly 
qualify  themselves  for  the  execution  of  their  office. 
A  preamble  was  attached  to  this  bill,  making  the 
act  declaratory,  and  so  worded  as  to  imply  a  censure 
upon  the  canvassing  committee  of  1792  ;  but  on  the 
motion  of  IMr.  Tillotson,  it  was  struck  out  by  one  ma- 
jority. This  vote  would  seem  to  indicate  that  a  majo- 
rity of  the  senate  was  friendly  to  the  governor.  Four 
senators  were  absent. 

The  assembly  took  into  consideration  the  proceed- 
ings on  the  memorial  against  Wiliam  Cooper,  which  had 
occupied  so  much  of  the  time  of  that  house  at  the  last 
session,  and  which  was  left  by  them  as  unfinished 
business  ;  but  Mr.  Hoffman,  previous  to  any  discussion, 
offered  a  resolution  purporting  that  the  complaints 
against  Judge  Cooper,  of  official  misconduct,  was  not 
supported  by  the  evidence,  and  that  the  memorial  be 
dismissed  "  as  frivolous  and  vexatious."  A  motion  was 
made  to  strike  out  that  part  of  the  resolution  which 
directed  the  memorial  to  be  dismissed  as  frivolous  and 
vexatious,  but  it  failed,  forty  to  nineteen.  Among  the 
names  of  those  who  voted  witli  the  majority,  I  find  that 
of  Ambrose  Spencer.  The  assembly  further  resolved 
that  the  clerk  should  cause  that  resolution  to  be  pub- 
lished In  three  of  the  public  newspapers.  That  there 
was  no  proof  of  official  misconduct,  is  undoubtedly 
correct;,  for  the  depositions  are  to  be  found  among  the 


1794.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  83 

minutes  of  the  assembly,  and  I  have  examined  them 
with  care.  But  unless  the  testimony  of  Andrew  Can- 
non, James  Moore,  (a  very  respectable  man,)  Mr.  Tur- 
niclifF,  who  was  then  a  magistrate,  and  Judge  Hudson, 
of  Cherry  Valley,  were  absolutely  false,  surely  the  me- 
morial was  not  ''frivolous.^^  This  was  unquestionably 
a  party  vote,  and  shows  the  great  strength  of  the  fede- 
ralists that  year  in  the  assembly.  fSee  JVote  A.  Vol.  2.] 

A  bill  was  introduced  into  the  assembly,  which  be- 
came a  law,  amending  the  statute  regulating  elec- 
tions, and  requiring  the  town  inspectors  to  canvass  the 
votes,  and  return  the  result  of  their  canvass  in  the 
same  manner  substantially,  as  is  now  practised.  * 

After  this,  nothing  material  occurred,  as  relates  to 
the  movements  of  the  two  parties,  until  after  the  election, 
in  1794.  That  election  terminated  as  the  preceding 
one  had  done,  in  favor  of  the  federalists. 

In  the  western  district,  Stephen  Van  Rensselaer  and 
John  Frey  were  re-elected  to  the  senate  almost  without 
opposition.  They  received  more  than  five  thousand 
votes,  and  the  opposing  candidates  failed  of  obtaining 
more  than  two  hundred  and  forty. 

In  October,  1794,  the  governor  caused  to  be  published 
a  protest,  drawn  up  by  him  on  the  last  day  of  the  meet- 
ing of  the  council,  which  was  the  24th  of  March  prece- 
ding, and  filed  by  him  in  the  office  of  the  secretary  of 
state,  against  the  proceedings  of  the  majority  of  the 
council. 

It  appears  that  the  council  had  decided,  that  in  all  ca- 
ses where  the  number  of  officers,  such  as  judges,  justices 
of  the  peace,  &c.,  was  not  ascertained  and  limited  by 
law,  the  number  should  be  fixed  by  the  majority  of  the 
council,  and  that  in  cases  where  the  officer  was  required 
to  be  commissioned  annually,  as  in  the  case  of  sheriffs, 

the  council  had  a  right  to  resist  the  re-appointment  of 
*  See  Note  N. 


84  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1794. 

the  Incumbent  without  assigning  any  cause  ;  and  there- 
by, as  Mr.  Clinton  alleged,  displacing  the  officer.  The 
governor  in  his  protest,  alleged  that  by  the  constitution 
he  was  charged  with  the  faithful  execution  of  the  laws, 
and  he  therefore  inferred,  that  according  to  the  spirit  of 
the  constitution,  he  was,  in  cases  not  provided  for  by  le- 
gislative enactment,  vested  with  exclusive  discretion  in 
respect  to  the  number  of  officers  necessary  for  the  proper 
execution  of  the  laws.  He,  being  held  responsible  for 
such  execution,  was  necessarily  the  judge  of  the  proper 
means  of  effecting  it.  If  that  discretion  was  confided  to 
others,  so  many  officers  might  be  created  as  to  cause 
confusion,  or  so  few  that  the  force  would  not  be  compe- 
tent to  accomplish  the  end. 

Again,  he  alleged  that  although  by  the  words  of  the 
constitution,  the  continuation  of  an  incumbent  in  office, 
was,  by  the  constitution,  referred  to  the  pleasure  of  the 
council,  "  by  this  was  not  intended  a  capricious,  arhitrary 
pleasure,  hut  a  sound  disci  etion  to  he  exercised  for  the 
promotion  of  the  puhlic  good?''  That  a  contrary  practice 
would  tend  to  render  the  action  of  the  government  un- 
stable, and  the  administration  of  justice  unsafe;  and  he 
added,  that  whenever  parties  exist,  the  consequence  of 
this  practice  would  be  "  to  deprive  men  of  their  offices  be- 
cause they  have  too  much  independence  of  spirit  to  sup- 
port measures  they  suppose  injurious  to  the  community ; 
and  might  induce  others  from  undue  attachment  to  office, 
to  sacrifice  their  iyitegrity  to  imi^roper  considerations." 
When  it  is  recollected,  that  at  the  time  this  remark  was 
made,  neither  the  council  on  whose  conduct  the  governor 
animadverted,  nor  any  other  class  of  men,  entertained 
for  a  moment,  the  idea  of  removing  able  and  faithful  offi' 
cers  because  of  their  political  opinions  ;  but  that  the 
governor  complained  because  the  council  then  in  office 
had  merely  refused  to  re-appoint  persons  eligible  to  a 


1794.1  OF   NEW-YORK.  85 

re-appointment,  who  had  discharged  their  duty  faith- 
fully, we  cannot  fail  to  perceive  the  severity  of  this  re- 
buke to  subsequent  councils,  many  of  whom  we  shall 
see  were  the  governor's  own  political  friends. 

Upon  the  publication  of  this  document.  Gen.  Schuyler, 
Selah  Strong  and  Zina  Hitchcock,  the  three  federal 
members  of  the  council,  published  a  very  long  reply  to 
it,  in  which  they  endeavored  to  show  that  Gov.  Clin- 
ton's practice  had  not  corresponded  with  the  precepts 
contained  in  his  protest.  But  it  will  be  found  that  they 
do  not  make  out  a  very  strong  case.  They  cite  several 
instances  where  appointments  in  the  militia  were  made 
not  according  to  seniority ;  and  particularly  the  case  of 
Gen.  John  Williams  of  Washington  county,  then  a  mem- 
ber of  the  state  senate,  who  had,  during  the  revolution- 
ary war,  been  removed  from  the  office  of  colonel,  and 
expelled  from  the  senate,  in  consequence  of  a  charge 
against  him  of  peculation  and  of  defrauding  the  officers 
and  privates  of  his  regiment,  but  who  had  subsequently 
been  appointed  out  of  the  regular  order  of  military  pro- 
motion to  the  office  of  brigadier  general.  The  only  civil 
case  to  which  they  refer,  is  that  of  Benjamin  Gilbert, 
who  in  the  winter  of  1792,  was  appointed  sheriflf  of  the 
county  of  Otsego,  and  at  the  end  of  the  year,  in  1793,  the 
governor  had  nominated,  and  with  the  consent  of  the 
council,  appointed  Samuel  Dickson  liis  successor,  with- 
out giving  Mr.  Gilbert  any  notice  of  charges  against 
him.  Mr.  G.  was  an  active  and  zealous  partizan  of 
Judge  Cooper ;  and  the  documents  which  had  been  com- 
municated to  the  legislature  on  the  subject  of  the  re- 
jection of  the  Otsego  votes  with  the  memorial  against 
Judge  Cooper,  implicated  him,  or  at  least  shewed  him  to 
be  an  heated  and  over-zealous  partizan.  That  these 
grave  counsellors,  after  their  laborious  search,  should 
have  been  able  to  find  only  one  instance  of  a  civil  ap- 


86  POLITICAL   HISTORY.  [1795. 

pointment,  and  that  an  extreme  one,  wherein  they 
thought  they  had  a  right  to  complain  of  the  governor's 
practice  as  having  been  inconsistent  with  his  doctrine, 
is,  in  my  judgment,  high  evidence  of  the  unexception- 
ble  manner  in  which  he  had  generally  exercised  the  ap- 
pointing power.* 

The  legislature  met  in  Poughkeepsie,  January  6,  1795. 
Gen.  North  of  Duanesburgh  was  chosen  speaker.  The 
contest  was  between  him  and  the  late  speaker,  Mr.  Wat- 

*  To  show  the  manner  of  proceeding  by  the  council  during  Got.  Clinton's 
administration,  when  an  attempt  was  made  to  remove  an  officer  who  held  his 
office  during  the  pleasure  of  the  appointing  power,  I  give  the  following  extract 
from  the  minutes  of  the  council  of  1787,  at  which  time  the  collectors  of  the  cus* 
toms  were  appointed  by  that  body. 

"At  a  council  of  appointment  held  at  the  senate  chamber  in  the  city  of  New- 
York,  on  Saturday,  the  21st  day  of  April,  1787. 

Fresent — His  Excellency  George  Clinton,  Esq.  President, 

Mr.  Russell,    )  Mp^hpr,  ^r.  Hathorn,  )  Members 

Mr.  Floyd,       \  Members.  jyj^  Schuyler.  \  »iemDers. 

James  Giles,  Esq.  exhibited  the  following  charges  against  John  Lamb,  collector 
of  the  port  of  New-York  : 

"  That  one  Stone  informed  him  that  three  cheeses  were  taken  coming  on  shore 
from  the  packet,  without  a  permit ;  that  the  collector  being  informed  thereof, 
s&d  it  would  not  answer  to  libel  them,  as  the  expense  of  libelling  was  too  high ; 
that  they  were  thereupon  divided,  and  the  collector  took  one.  That  Mr.  Stevens, 
one  of  the  tide  waiters,  had  applied  to  him  to  libel  seven  cheeses  which  had 
been  seized  for  being  landed  contrary  to  law;  that  he  drew  the  libel  ;  on  which 
Mr.  Stevens  desired  him  to  stop  the  prosecution,  because  the  collector  told  him  the 
expenses  would  exceed  the  value  of  the  cheese ;  that  the  said  Stevens  informed 
him  that  the  said  cheeses  were  divided  between  the  collector  and  him. 

"  The  said  John  Lamb  being  present,  requested  of  the  council  to  be  heard  in  his 
defence;  whereupon  Resoh-ed,  that  the  council  will  be  ready  to  hear  the  parties 
with  their  respective  evidences  on  Monday  next,  at  nine  o'clock  in  the  morning," 
to  which  time  the  council  then  adjourned. 

On  Monday,  23d  April,  the  council  met  pursuant  to  adjournment.  The  parties 
appeared,  and  the  above  and  several  other  charges  were  exhibited  by  Mr.  Giles 
and  Mr.  Roorback  against  Mr.  Lamb.     The  record  then  states  that 

"The  council  having  heard  the  proofs,  and  allegations  in  support  of  the  seve- 
ral charges  exhibited  as  aforesaid  against  John  Lamb,  esquire,  and  having  also 
examined  the  books  of  the  custom  house,  and  the  several  manifests  and  vouchers, 
as  to  the  duties  in  the  several  cases  in  which  such  malpractices  where  charged, 
and  having  duly  considered  the  same, 

"  Resolved,  That  in  the  opinion  of  this  council,  the  charges  exhibited  against  the 
said  John  Lamb,  esquire,  are  wholly  unsupported  and  groundless,  and  that  from 
the  investigation  of  the  said  charges,  and  the  evidence  produced  in  support  of  them 
nothing  hath  appeared  to  alter  in  the  least  degree,  the  good  opinion  this  council 
entertains  of  the  fidelity  and  integrity  of  thn  said  collector  in  the  execution  of 
tiis  office." 


1795.]  OF   NEW-YOBK.  87 

son.  Both  gentlemen  were  federalists,  but  the  northern 
and  western  members  generally  supported  North,  and  he 
was  elected  by  a  vote  of  thirty-three  against  twenty-eight. 

Governor  Clinton  addressed  a  letter  to  the  lieutenant  gov- 
ernor and  speaker  of  the  house,  dated  at  Greenwich,  where 
he  then  was,  informing  them  that  he  was  and  had  been  for 
a  longtime  confined  to  his  room  by  sickness,  (the  inflamma- 
tory rheumatism,)  and  that  he  was  apprehensive  he  should 
be  unable  personally  to  be  at  Poughkeepsie  during  the 
session  ;  he  therefore,  instead  of  the  usual  annual  speech, 
sent  them  a  written  message. 

In  his  messsage,  he  exhorted  the  legislature  to  take 
measures  for  putting  the  state  in  a  better  condition  to  re- 
pel invasion,  and  he  again  urged  upon  the  legislature  the 
propriety  of  revising  the  criminal  laws.  He  recommended 
confinement  at  hard  labor  to  be  substituted  for  the  punish- 
ment of  many  crimes  for  which  death  was  then  inflicted. 
He  also  reminded  the  legislature,  that  while  liberal  provi- 
sions had  been  made  for  the  endowment  of  colleges  and 
other  seminaries  in  which  the  higher  branches  of  learning 
were  taught,  no  legislative  aid  had  yet  been  given  to  Com- 
mon Schools,  and  he  recommended  that  provi^ons  should 
be  made  for  their  improvement  and  encouragement.  This 
was  the  first  official  movement  made  in  this  state  in  behalf 
of  those  institutions — institutions  upon  which,  under  God, 
depend  the  preservation  of  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the 
people  of  this  state.  I  am  happy  to  perceive  that  the  legis- 
lature did  not  disregard  this  recommendation  j  on  the 
contrary,  at  that  very  session,  they  passed  a  law  appropri- 
ating annually  for  five  years  the  simi  of  fifty  thousand  dol- 
lars, and  directed  the  specific  sums  to  be  paid  by  the  treas- 
urer to  each  county.  The  act  further  provided,  that  the 
board  of  supervisors  in  the  respective  counties,  should  ap- 
portion the  money  among  the  respective  towns,  and  a  sum 
equal  to  one-half  the  sum  received  from  the  state  by  the 


88  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1795. 

several  towns  was  required  to  be  raised  by  a  tax  on  such 
town  and  added  to  the  bounty  of  the  state.  The  sum  thus 
made  up  was  to  be  distributed  in  each  school  district  un- 
der the  direction  of  town  commissioners. 

Jacobus  Van  Schoouhoven,  Richard  Hatfield,  William 
Powers,  and  Joseph  Hasbrouck  were  elected  members  of 
the  council  of  appointment  this  year,  the  three  former  of 
whom  were  federalists.  The  election  of  Mr.  Hasbrouck 
was  unanimous.  The  average  vote  on  the  choice  of  the 
other  members  was  thirty-six  to  twenty-nine  j  showing  a 
federal  majority  in  the  assembly  of  seven. 

The  term  of  service  of  Rufus  King,  in  the  U.  S.  Senate, 
was  to  expire  on  the  4th  March,  1795,  and  on  the  27th 
January,  he  was  re-elected  for  the  six  succeeding  years. 
The  vote  stood  for  Mr.  K.  in  the  senate,  two  majority  ;  in 
the  assembly,  five.  About  this  time.  Gov.  Clinton  publish- 
ed an  address  to  the  Freeholders  of  the  state  of  New- 
York,  dated  on  the  22nd  January,  in  which  he  declined 
being  a  candidate  for  governor  at  the  ensuing  election. 
The  letter,  like  all  his  written  communications,  is  short, 
but  it  does  honor  to  his  head  and  heart.  He  had  held,  he 
said,  for  n^rly  thirty  years  elective  offices,  [he  was  seve- 
ral years  a  member  of  the  colonial  assembly,]  which  had 
cornp^lled  him  to  devote  almost  all  his  time  to  the  dis- 
^-"•dliarge  of  the  duties  connected  with  them,  and  his  private 
^X  affairs  required  his  attention.     His  health,  too,  had  be- 

come, so  much  impaired,  as  to  render  it  his  duty  to  retire 
from  active  business.  In  allusion  to  the  office  he  then 
held,  he  said  he  "  withdrew  from  a  situation  never  solicit- 
ed by  him,  which  he  accepted  with  diffidence,  and  from 
which,"  said  he, "  I  shall  retire  with  pleasure."  He  thank- 
ed them  cordially  and  feelingly  for  their  continued  confi- 
dence and  support  during  the  tryingscenes  through  which 
he  had  passed.     He  was  then  about  fifty-six  years  old. 


1795.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  89 

Lieut.  Gov.  Van  Cortland  at  the  same  time  declined 
a  re-election  in  consequence  of  his  advanced  age. 

Mr.  Clinton  had  filled  the  exective  chair  from  the 
organization  of  the  government;  but  the  step  now 
taken  by  him  rendered  certain  that  a  change  in  that  im- 
portant office  would  be  produced  at  the  next  election. 
Some  difficulty  was  felt  by  the  federalists  in  the  selec- 
tion of  a  candidate  for  governor.  Mr-  Hamilton  was 
spoken  of,  but  he  positively  declined.  Mr.  Jay  was  in 
England,  where  he  had  been  sent,  much  against  his  own 
wishes,  to  negotiate  a  treaty  with  the  government  of 
that  country.  He  was  beyond  question,  not  only  the 
most  competent,  but  personally  the  most  unexception- 
able candidate ;  and  the  indignation  felt  at  the  manner 
in  which  his  election  had  been  defeated  in  1792,  furnish- 
ed additional  capital  in  his  favor.  It  was,  however,  then 
generally  anticipated  that  Mr.  Jay  would  conclude  a 
treaty  with  Great  Britain,  and  the  warm  sympathy  felt 
for  the  French  republic,  combined  with  the  existing 
prejudices  against  Great  Britain,  which  pervaded  the 
mass  of  people  in  the  state  of  New-York,  rendered  it 
more  than  probable,  that  Mr.  Jay's  treaty  would  be 
unpopular,  and  that  a  portion  of  odium  would  attach  to 
the  negociator.  This  consideration  might  well  have 
excited,  and  did  in  fact  produce  doubts  of  the  expedi- 
ency of  fixing  upon  Mr.  Jay  as  the  gubernatorial  candi- 
date ;  but  then  it  was  expected  that  the  contents  of  the 
treaty,  if  one  should  be  concluded,  would  not  be  made 
public  until  after  the  election,  and  it  would  be  too  absurd 
for  a  party  to  oppose  Mr.  Jay  for  agreeing  to  make  a 
treaty,  without  knowing  what  that  treaty  contained. 
The  event  justified  the  expectation  of  the  federalists. 
The  contents  of  the  treaty  were  not  publicly  known  till 
the  2nd  July,  1795. 


90  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1795. 

The  federalists  finally,  at  a  sort  of  legislative  caucus, 
nominated  John  Jay  for  governor,  and  Stephen  Van 
Rensselaer  for  lieutenant  governor.  Mr.  William  Jay 
(1  Jay,  355)  says  this  nomination  was  made  without  the 
knowledge  of  his  father. 

The  democratic  party,  after  anxiously  looking  about 
for  candidates,  at  length  selected  Chief  Justice  Yates 
for  governor,  and  William  Floyd  for  lieutenant  gover- 
nor. Col.  Burr  had  been  spoken  of  as  a  candidate,  I 
believe,  by  individuals  of  both  parties,  but  his  nomina- 
tion by  the  majority  of  either  party  could  not  be  obtain- 
ed. Judge  Yates  surely  could  not  complain  of  a  want 
of  public  attention,  for  within  the  space  of  six  years, 
he  was  the  candidate  for  both  political  parties,  and  must 
at  one  time  and  the  other  have  received  the  votes  of 
nearly  all  the  freeholders  in  the  state.  If  we  were 
allowed  to  consider  the  two  elections  one,  he  actually 
received  the  votes  of  nearly  all  the  freeholders  in  the 
state  for  the  office  of  governor,  and  yet  was  not  elected. 
Was  not  such  a  result  politically  right  ? 

At  the  April  election,  in  1795,  Mr.  Jay  and  Mr.  Van 
Rensselaer  received  a  large  majority  of  the  votes  of  the 
freeholders  of  the  state,  and  were  declared  by  the  state 
canvassers  duly  elected.  The  federalists  also  obtained  a 
maiority  in  both  houses  of  the  legislature. 


^^%7l  J6l 


1795.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  91 


CHAPTER    IV. 


FROM  APRIL,  1796,  TO  MAY,  179S. 

The  senators  elected  this  year,  were  John  D.  Coe, 
Richard  Hatfield,  Philip  Livingston,  Ambrose  Spencer 
and  John  Frey,  all  of  them  federalists. 

De  Witt  Clinton,  afterwards  governor  of  the  state, 
was  one  of  the  candidates  of  the  republicans  of  New- 
York,  for  member  of  the  assembly  from  the  city,  but  fail- 
ed of  obtaining  his  election. 

The  result  of  the  state  canvass  was  declared  on  the 
26th  May,  and  two  days  afterwards,  Mr.  Jay  arrived  in 
New-York,  from  the  court  of  London,  after  an  absence  of 
a  year  and  sixteen  days.*  His  arrival  was  hailed  by  the 
acclamations  of  the  inhabitants  of  his  native  city.  "  A 
large  concourse  of  citizens,"  says  Mr.  William  Jay,  "  as- 
sembled to  welcome  their  new  governor,  and  to  greet  the 
envoy  whose  successful  mission  procured  peace  to  the 
country  j  the  crowd  attended  him  to  his  dwelling,  and 
the  ringing  of  bells  and  the  firing  of  cannon  evinced  the 
joy  his  arrival  had  inspired." — (1  Jay^  356.) 

Although  the  biography  of  Gov.  Jay,  to  which  I  have 
referred,  was  written  by  his  son,  Judge  Jay  of  Westches- 
ter county,  it  is  nevertheless  most  evidently  executed  with 
great  candor  and  impartiality,  and  a  sacred  regard  to 
truth,  as  is  everything  else  that  comes  from  the  pen  of^ 
that  pure  and  benevolent  man.     Notwithstanding  this,  1 

*  He  sailed  for  England,  May  12,  1794.— 1  Jay,  314. 


92  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [l79o. 

cannot  but  suggest  that  public  demonstrations  of  approba- 
tion and  respect  for  men  possessed  of  power,  and  who  at 
their  discretion,  dispose  of  state  patronage,  are  in  most 
■^'  instances,  even  in  this  free  country,  extremely  deceptive. 
That  there  were  many  in  that  great  assemblage  of  citi- 
zens, who  joined  with  the  multitude  in  shouting  hosannas 
to  Mr.  Jay,  "  who  followed  him  for  the  loaves  andjishesy^ 
but  whose  hearts  at  that  moment  burned  with  envy  and 
jealousy,  I  have  not  a  shadow  of  doubt.  The  outbreak 
of  popular  indignation  which  -shortly  afterwards  was  ex- 
hibited on  the  publication  of  the  British  treaty,  afford  pre- 
sumptive evidence  of  the  truth  of  this  suggestion. 

It  would  be  quite  foreign  from  my  object  to  discuss  the 
merits  of  that  treaty,  and  at  this  time,  such  a  discussion 
would  be  useless,  even  if  its  merits  came  within  the  scope 
of  the  task  I  have  undertaken  to  perform.  It  must  suffice 
to  remark,  that  while  on  the  one  hand,  I  believe  it  will  be 
now  admitted,  that  the  treaty  did  contain  some  stipulations 
seriously  objectionable  ;  on  the  other,  that,  considering 
the  relative  situation  of  the  two  nations,  it  was  the  best 
treaty  which  could  at  that  time  have  been  obtained,  that 
few  men,  and  perhaps  no  other  man  in  the  United  States 
except  Mr.  Jay,  would  have  been  able  to  have  procured 
a  treaty  as  favorable  to  America  as  the  one  in  question  j* 
that  its  rejection  would  have  brought  on  a  war  between 
Great  Britain  and  this  country,  and  that  its  ratification  with 
all  its  imperfections,  was  less  injurious  to  the  United 
States  than  a  w^ar  at  that  time  would  have  been. 

But  so  prevalent  was  party  spirit,  and  so  intemperate 
was  its  zeal,  that  the  treaty  was  denounced  before  its  con- 
tents were  known.  Some  of  the  newspapers,  claiming  to 
be  republican,  being,  as  I  fear,  too  much  under  the  influ- 
ence of  Mr.  Genet,  who  dexterously  availed  himself  of 

•  Gov.  Jay  and  Lord  Grenrille  the  British  negociator,  were  personal  ftiends 


1795.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  93 

tlie  sympathy  of  the  Americans  in  favor  of  the  French  m 
their  struggle  for  liberty  and  equality,  before  it  was  knoivn 
what  the  treaty  contained,  discoursed  in  the  following 
manner  :  "  The  United  States  are  a  republic.  Is  it  advan- 
tageous for  a  republic  to  have  a  connexion  with  a  mon- 
arch 7  Treaties  lead  to  war.  *  *  *  If  the  influence 
of  a  treaty  is  added  to  the  influence  which  Great  Brit- 
ain already  has  in  our  goverament,  we  shall  be  colonized 
anew."  *  *  *  "  No  treaty  ought  to  have  been  made 
with  Great  Britain.  *  *  To  make  a  treaty  with  Great 
Britain  is  forming  connexion  with  a  monarch." 

On  the  2d  of  July,  the  treaty  was  published  in  a  news- 
paper in  Philadelphia.  "  This  act"  says  Wm.  Jay,  "  was 
putting  the  torch  to  that  vast  mass  of  combustibles  which 
the  party  had  long  been  engaged  in  collecting,  and  the  in- 
tended explosion  instantly  followed."  Mr.  Jay  was 
burnt  in  eflSgy  by  the  mob  in  Philadelphia,  two  days  after 
the  treaty  was  made  public.  The  eflSgy  bore  a  pair  of 
scales,  one  labelled  "  American  Liberty  and  Indepen- 
dence," and  the  other  "  British  Gold."  From  the  mouth 
of  the  figure,  proceeded  the  following  words  :  "  Come  up 
to  my  price,  and  I  will  sell  you  my  country."  Public 
meetings  were  held  in  almost  every  part  of  the  union, 
denouncing  the  treaty.  In  New- York,  one  was  convened 
in  the  open  air,  and  attended  by  an  immense  crowd. 
Gen.  Hamilton  attempted  to  address  the  meeting,  but 
was  pelted  with  stones,  and  compelled  to  retreat.  The 
party,  after  adopting  violent  resolutions  against  the  treaty, 
marched  with  the  American  and  French  colors  flying,  to 
a  place  opposite  the  goveinor's  house,  and  burned  the 
treaty.— (1.  Jay,  360.) 

It  is  by  no  means  impossible,  that  some  of  the  very  men 
who  were  active  in  this  violent  outrage,  composed  a  part 
of  the  company  who  but  "  a  little  month  "  before,  had  con- 


94  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1795. 

ducted  Mr.  Jay  to  his  house  with  shouts  of  applause — so 
transient  is  popular  favor  ! 

It  would  be  doing  injustice  to  the  great  body  of  the  re- 
publicans of  this  state,  to  charge  them  with  participating  in, 
or  approving  of,  these  outrages.  The  candid  and  reflect- 
ing part  of  that  party  opposed  Mr,  Jay,  because  they  con- 
sidered him  as  acting  in  concert  wnth  Gen.  Hamilton,  in 
the  attempt  to  monopolize  and  so  to  bestow  the  patronage 
of  the  general  government  as  to  prostrate  all  who,  (how- 
ever conscientiously,)  had  opposed  the  adoption  of  the 
federal  constitution  ;  and  especially  Governor  Clinton, 
whom  the  republicans  considered  an  able  statesman  and 
sound  patriot.  They  also  apprehended  that  Mr.  Jay  being 
now  constituted  the  dispenser  of  the  patronage  of  the  state 
government  would,  in  connection  with  Gen.  Hamilton, 
who  in  reality  wielded  the  national  patronage,  so  distri- 
bute the  same  as  greatly  to  increase  the  personal  influence 
of  Mr.  Hamilton  and  his  immediate  coadjutors,  which  they 
considered  already  too  formidable.  But  the  substantial 
ground  of  opposition,  by  the  republicans  to  Mr.  Jay  and 
the  leading  federalists  was,  that  they  entirely  disapproved 
of  some  of  their  avowed  political  opinions,  of  which  I 
shall  speak  more  particularly  hereafter,  in  relation  to  the 
powers  which  of  right  ought  to  be  exercised  by  the  gene- 
ral government. 

If  the  British  treaty  had  been  published  on  the  first  of 
April,  instead  of  the  first  of  July,  it  is  not  probable  that 
Mr.  Jay  would  hav€  been  elected  governor  j  for  to  those 
who  from  the  considerations  I  have  just  mentioned  were 
opposed  to  him,  would  have  been  added  all  those  who,  at 
the  instant  the  treaty  was  published,  disapproved  of  it. 
It  is  true  Mr.  Jay  was  re-elected  in  1798,  but  that  was  af- 
ter the  federal  party  had  had  ample  time  to  rally  from  the 
shock  produced  by  the  publication  of  the  treaty,  and  after 
they  had  for  three  years  enjoyed  the  aid  of  the  patronage 


1796.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  95 

of  the  state  and  national  governments,  with  which  to 
strengthen  themselves.  In  proof  that  this  hypothesis  is 
correctj  it  may  be  remarked,  that  the  city  of  New-York, 
which  until  the  summer  of  1795,  was  nearly  unanimously 
federal,  in  December,  (the  month  in  which  the  election  of 
members  of  congress  was  at  that  time  made,)  Mr.  Edward 
Livingston,  a  very  decided  republican  was  elected  to  con- 
gress in  opposition  to  Mr.  James  Watson,  a  very  popular 
man,  who  was  the  federal  candidate. 

On  the  6th  January,  1796,  the  legislature  convened  in 
the  city  of  New- York.  Gen.  North  was  again  elected 
speaker  against  Mr.  Watson,  by  a  vote  of  twenty-nine  to 
eighteen. 

The  new  governor  in  his  speech  at  the  opening  of  the 
session,  after  expressing  his  gratitude  to  the  freeholders 
of  the  state  for  the  confidence  placed  in  him,  as  evinced  by 
their  votes  at  the  recent  election,  declared  his  determina- 
tion "  to  regard  all  his  fellow-citizens  with  an  equal  eye, 
and  to  cherish  and  advance  merit  wherever  found, '^'^  This 
determination  was  in  theory  noble,  and  deserving  of  the 
highest  commendation  ;  but  it  is  deeply  to  be  regretted 
that  neither  Gov.  Jay  or  any  other  individual  holding  the 
appointing  power  could,  even  if  sincerely  disposed,  carry 
it  into  effect  in  the  then,  and  in  the  present,  state  of  public 
feeling,  without  a  sacrifice  of  himself  and  his  party.  The 
best  and  most  virtuous  men  must,  in  the  distribution  of 
patronage,  yield  to  the  influence  of  party  considerations. 
This  is  excused,  if  not  justified,  by  the  following  process 
of  reasoning  : — An  honest  and  patriotic  citizen  will,  from 
conscientious  motives,  attach  himself  to  that  party  which 
he  believes  will  pursue  those  measures  which,  in  his  judg- 
ment, are  best  calculated  to  advance  the  prosperity  and 
happiness,  and  most  effectually  preserve  the  liberty  and 
independence  of  his  country.  If  vested  with  the  appoint- 
ing power,  it  therefore  becomes  his  duty  to  confer  offices 


96  POLITICAL    HISTOBY  [1796. 

on  such  men  as  will  use  the  influence  created  by  such  of- 
fice, to  increase  and  strengthen  that  party,  the  ascendancy 
of  which,  in  the  opinion  of  the  person  appointing,  is  iden- 
tified with  the  best  interests  of  the  state.  Hence,  although 
he  ought  not  under  any  circumstances,  to  appoint  incom- 
petent or  unworthy  men  to  office,  yet  between  worthy 
men  of  equal  capacity,  it  is  his  duty  to  select  those  who 
concur  with  him  in  opinion,  as  respects  the  measures  best 
calculated  to  advance  the  public  good.  This  reasoning, 
if  not  conclusive,  is  at  least  plausible.  The  governor  re- 
commended to  the  legislature  to  provide  without  delay  for 
the  defence  of  the  state  in  case  of  war.  In  the  course  of 
his  speech,  he  stated  that  doubts  had  arisen  as  to  the  true 
construction  of  the  constitution  in  relation  to  the  exclusive 
right  of  the  person  administering  the  government,  to  nomi- 
nate all  officers  to  the  council  of  appointment :  alluding, 
no  doubt,  to  the  disputes  between  the  late  Gov.  Clinton 
and  the  council,  which  occurred  at  the  recent  appointment 
of  Judge  Benson  ;  and  he  requested  the  legislature  to  pass 
a  declaratory  law  on  that  subject.  He  also  recommended 
that  provisions  should  be  made  for  the  payment  of  a  sala- 
ry or  pension  to  the  chancellor  and  judges  of  the  supreme 
court,  after  they  should  become  ineligible  by  age  to  hold 
their  respective  offices. 

The  answer  of  the  two  houses  was  respectful  and  high- 
ly complimentary.  To  show  how  far  the  senate  were  in- 
clined to  extend  their  courtesy  to  the  executive,  and  to 
soothe  if  not  flatter  the  feelings  of  the  governor,  I  cannot 
forbear  to  note,  that  in  the  original  draft  of  the  answer  of 
the  senate,  I  find  the  following  sentence  :  "  The  evidence 
of  ability,  integrity  and  patriotism  which  have  been  afford- 
ed by  your  conduct,  in  the  discharge  of  the  variety  of  ar- 
duous and  important  public  trusts,  authorize  us  to  antici- 
pate an  administration  conducive  to  the  welfare  of  your 
constituents."     When  the  senate  was  in  committee  of  the 


1796.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  97 

whole  on  the  answer  as  reported  by  the  select  committee, 
Mr.  Spencer  moved  to  add  the  word  "  invariably "  be- 
tween the  words  "  been  "  and  "  afforded^^''  so  that  the  sen- 
tence would  read,  "  The  evidence  of  abilityj  integrity  and 
patriotism  which  have  been  invariably  afforded,"  &c.  In 
favor  of  this  amendment,  were  Cruger,  Hatfield,  Frey, 
Jones,  Ph.  Livingston,  Myers,  Russell,  Schuyler,  Spen- 
cer, Strong,  and  Van  Schoonhoven,  11  ;  against  it,  were 
Cantine,  Hopkins,  L'Hommedieu,  Abm.  Schenck,  John 
Schenck,  and  Woodworth,  6.  It  is  unnecessary  to  com- 
ment on  this  instance  of  legislative  sycophancy. 

So  far  as  the  two  houses  referred  in  their  answer  to  par- 
ticular parts  of  the  governor's  speech,  they  concurred  with 
him  in  the  measures  which  he  recommended,  but  they 
carefully  avoided  any  allusions  to  the  questions  relating  to 
the  exclusive  right  of  the  governor  to  nominate  to  office, 
or  the  propriety  of  pensioning  the  chancellor  and  judges 
of  the  supreme  court.  The  legislature  declined  acting  on 
either  of  those  subjects.*  On  this  question  the  parties 
were  situated  rather  singularly  ;  and  action  upon  it  would 
have  been  embarrassing  to  each  of  them.  The  federalists 
whose  interest  it  now  was  that  the  governor  should  retain 
the  exclusive  right  of  nomination,  could  not  pass  an  act 
declarmg  that  right  vested  in  him,  without  an  indirect 
censure  upon  their  friends  in  and  out  of  the  council  of 
appointment,  who  insisted  that,  by  the  constitution,  the 
council  held  a  right  of  nomination  concurrent  with  the 
governor,  at  the  time  when  Egbert  Benson  was  appointed 
a  judge  of  the  supreme  court.  On  the  other  hand,  it  had 
now  become  the  interest  of  the  republican  party,  which 
then  contended  that  the  governor  was  vested  with  the  ex- 
clusive right  of  nomination,  to  resist  the  exercise  of  the 

*  Gen.  Morris  of  Otsego  did.  it  is  true,  on  the  29th  January,  on  his  own  motion, 
biing  a  bill  into  the  asscmblsr  declaring  tliat  the  governor  possessed  the  sole  right 
of  nomioalii>8  to  office,  but  it  does  not  appear  to  have  been  acted  upon  definitely. 

7 


98  POLITICAL,     HISTORY  [1796. 

right,  and  of  course,  to  deny  that  it  existed.  Under  such 
circumstances,  it  is  not  at  all  surprising  that  Mr.  Morris 
was  unable  to  obtain  any  decisive  action  on  his  bill, 
although  it  was  recommended  by  the  governor. 

It  is  to  be  presumed  that  reflecting  men  of  both  parties, 
were  indisposed  to  commence  the  practice  of  pensioning 
persons  who  had  held  civil  offices,  because  they  had  held 
them. 

The  council  of  appointment  chosen  this  year  consisted  of 
Joshua  Sands,  Abraham  Schenck,  Ebenezer  Russell,  and 
Michael  Myers,  three  of  whom  were  federalists. 

During  the  session,  Mr.  Jones  brought  in  a  bill  to  facili- 
tate the  trial  of  criminal  cases  at  the  oyer  and  terminer 
courts,  by  dividing  the  state  into  districts  and  providing 
for  the  appointment  of  a  prosecuting  attorney  in  each  dis- 
trict, which  passed  into  a  law.  I  observe  that  these  offi- 
cers were  called  assistant  attorney  generals,  a  name  more 
appropriate  than  that  of  district  attornies,  which  has  since 
been  given  them.  Jacob  RatclifF  was,  under  this  law,  ap- 
pointed assistant  attorney  general  for  the  district  compo- 
sed of  Dutchess,  Orange,  and  Ulster  ;  Ambrose  Spencer 
for  the  district  composed  of  Columbia,  &c.  Mr.  James 
Kent,  who  had  recently  removed  from  the  county  of 
Dutchess  to  the  city  of  New-York,  was  appointed  master 
in  chancery.  All  these  gentlemen  afterwards  held  high 
judicial  stations. 

By  a  census  returned  to  the  office  of  the  secretary  of 
state  on  the  20th  January,  1796,  it  appeared  that  the  num- 
ber of  freeholders  in  the  state  amounted  to  thirty-six  thou- 
sand three  hundred  and  thirty-eight,  and  the  voters,  inclu- 
ding voters  for  members  of  assembly,  amounted  to  sixty- 
six  thousand  and  seventeen.  The  number  of  freeholders 
in  the  city  and  county  of  New-York,  were  two  thousand 
one  hundred  and  forty-four,  and  the  total  number  of  voters 
seven   thousand   two    hundred   and    seventy-two.       The 


1798.1  OF    NEW- YORK.  99 

great  increase  of  freeholders,  since  the  last  census  had 
been  taken,  was  caused  principally  by  the  constant  and 
rapid  emigration  from  the  New  England  states  to  the 
western  district.  That  district  then  included  the  county 
of  Albany  and  all  the  counties  west  of  it. 

At  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  constitution,  in  1777, 
the  number  of  senators  was  fixed  at  twenty-four,  but,  by 
the  twelfth  article,  when  the  number  of  electors  in  any  one 
district  should  increase  to  an  amount  equal  to  one  twenty- 
fourth  of  their  whole  number  in  the  state,  as  then  existing, 
an  additional  senator  should  be  chosen  by  such  district ; 
and,  by  another  article,  the  number  of  senators  might  be 
thus  increased  until  the  whole  number  of  senators  should 
amount  to  one  hundred.  Therefore,  according  to  the 
census  of  1796,  in  pursuance  of  these  regulations,  forty- 
four  senators  were  to  be  chosen,  seventeen  of  whom  were 
to  be  elected  from  the  western  district.  But,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  equalizing  the  districts,  an  act  was  soon  afterwards 
passed,  annexing  the  counties  of  Albany  and  Saratoga  to 
the  eastern  district. 

Governor  Jay  was  known  to  be  in  favor  of  the  abo- 
lition of  slavery  in  this  state j  but  he  omitted,  as  his  son 
(Judge  Jay)  thinks,  to  recommend  that  measure  in  his 
speech,  "  from  the  conviction  that  in  the  present  state  of 
politics  such  a  proposition  emanating  from  him  would  en- 
list the  spirit  of  party  in  opposition  to  a  measure  against 
which  the  prejudices  of  a  large  portion  of  the  community 
were  already  enlisted."  But,  according  to  the  same  wri- 
ter, a  few  days  after  the  commencement  of  the  session, 
"  an  intimate  friend  of  the  governor's  obtained  leave  to 
introduce  a  bill  for  the  gradual  abolition  of  slavery." — (1 
Jay^  390.) 

The  bill  underwent  a  long  and  somewhat  heated  dis- 
cussion, and  was  finally  got  rid  of  by  a  resolution  offered 
by  one  of  the  members  opposed  to  abolition,  purporting 


idO  POLITICAL    HISTORY  1796.] 

that  it  would  be  unjust  to  deprive  any  citizen  of  his  pro- 
perty, unless  a  reasonable  compensation  for  the  value  of  it 
should  be  paid  to  him  by  the  state.  On  this  resolution, 
the  vote  stood  thirty-one  to  thirty-one,  but  it  was  carried 
by  the  casting  vote  of  the  chairman  of  the  committee  of 
the  whole.  Mr.  Foote,  afterwards  first  judge  of  the  county 
of  Delaware,  was  the  chairman,  and  gave  the  casting 
vote. 

No  other  material  event  operating  on  the;  action  of 
political  parties,  occurred  during  this  session  of  the  legis- 
lature. 

The  election  in  the  spring  of  1796,  teiminated  highly 
favorable  to  the  federalists.  The  excitement  in  relation 
to  the  British  treaty  had  partially  subsided.  The  violent 
conduct  of  the  French  republic  and  their  agent  in  this 
country,  the  popularity  of  Gen.  Washington,  the  purity 
of  Gov.  Jay's  character,  and  the  rectitude  of  his  conduct, 
together  with  the  governmental  patronage,  had  enabled 
the  federalists  to  recover  the  ground  which  they  lost  im- 
mediately after  the  promulgation  of  the  treaty.  In  the 
southern  district,  Messrs.  Haight,  Onderdonk,  Strong,  and 
Watson  were  elected  to  the  senate  by  a  majority  of  about 
fifteen  hundred.  In  the  middle  district,  the  senators  cho- 
sen were,  Robert  Sands,  C.  Tappan  and  Wm.  Thomson. 
The  election  in  this  district  was  very  close,  Mr.  Tappan 
being  the  only  republican  who  succeeded.  In  the  eastern 
district,  E.  Clarke,  M.  Vail,  J.  Savage,  P.  Sylvester  and 
A.  Ten  Eyck,  all  federalists,  were  chosen  by  a  majority 
of  from  one  to  eight  hundred.  In  the  western  district, 
the  federal  ticket  succeeded  almost  without  opposition, 
and  Jed.  Sanger,  Jas.  Gordon,  Leonard  Gansevoort, 
Thomas  Morris,  Thomas  R.  Gold,  John  Richardson, 
Johannes  Dietz,  Vincent  Matthews,  Jacob  Morris,  Leo- 
nard Brown,  Francis  Nicol,  Joseph  White,  and  Abraham 
Arndt  were  elected.     The  great  number  of  new  senators 


1796.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  101 

chosen   from  the  western  district  gave  the  federalists  a 
prodigious  preponderance  in  the  senate. 

The  legislature  met  in  the  city  of  New-York,  on  the 
first  of  November.     The  occasion  of  meeting  thus  early 
was  in   order   to  make  choice  of    presidential  electors. 
Gulian  Verplanck    of  New-York,   was  chosen  speaker. 
The  governor's  speech  contained  nothing  which  it  is  ne- 
cessary particularly  to  notice.     It  is,  however,  an  excel- 
lent document,  and  the  youthful  student  will  find  himself 
Well  repaid  for  perusing  it.     The  governor's  eulogy  upon 
Gen.  Washington,  who  had  declined  a  re-election,  is  ad- 
mirable.    Upon  the  refusal  of  Washington  to  become  a 
third  time  a  candidate  for  the  presidency,  the  federalists 
of  the  northern  and  eastern  states  were  in  favor  of  Mr. 
John  Adams.     That  such  was  the  inclination  of  an  im- 
mense majority  of  the  federalists  of  New-York,  I  have  no 
manner  of  doubt.     That  Gov.  Jay  was  not  only  the  poli- 
tical, but  personal  friend  of  Mr.  Adams,  is  most  evident 
from  his  correspondence  with  that  distinguished  indivi- 
dual.— (See  1  Jay,  417.)     But  from  a  letter  or  pamphlet, 
written  and    published    by  Gen.  Hamilton,  in  the  year 
1800,  on  which  I  shall  have  occasion  hereafter  to  remark 
more  particularly,  it  appears  that  his  favorite  candidate 
for  the  presidency  was  Thomas  Pinckney,  of  South-Caro- 
lina, the  federal  candidate  for  vice-president.     I  hardly 
need  mention,  that  by  the  United  States  constitution  pre- 
vious to  its  amendment,  which  was  made  shortly  after  the 
election  of  1800.  the  president  and  vice-president  were  to 
be  both  voted  for  on  one  ticket,  without  designating  which 
was  intended  for  the  one  or  the  other  office;  and  the  person 
having  the  highest  number  of  votes  was  elected  president, 
and  he  who  received  the  next  highest  number  of  votes 
was  chosen    vice-president.     Mr.    Hamilton    urged  the 
northern  and  eastern  federalists  to  give  Messrs.  Adams 
and  Pinckney  an  equal  number  of  votes,  and  it  appears 


LIBRARY 
XJNIVERSTTY  OF  Ci^LTFORMT,*:' 


102  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1796. 

from  the  letter  to  which  I  have  referred,  that  he  hoped 
that  by  chance  or  some  other  means,  Mr.  Adams  might  be 
left  off  of  some  of  the  southern  tickets,  which  contained 
the  name  of  Mr.  Pinckney,  and  in  that  event  he  would 
have  been  elected.  This  event  actually  occurred.  The 
state  of  South-Carolina  gave  eight  votes  to  Thomas  Pinck- 
ney, and  eight  votes  to  Thomas  Jefferson.  Whether  this 
was  done  by  "  chance"  or  design,  it  w^ould  have  caused 
the  election  of  Mr.  Pinckney  for  president,  had  all  the 
other  federal  states  followed  the  advice  of  Gen.  Hamil- 
ton, and  it  is  not  improbable  that  he  and  some  of  his 
South-Carolina  friends  expected  they  would  do  so ;  but, 
unfortunately  for  the  projectors  of  the  scheme,  if  such  a 
scheme  was  projected,  the  federal  states  of  Rhode-Island 
and  New-Hampshire  gave  their  votes  for  Oliver  Ells- 
worth, Massachusetts  gave  two  votes  to  Samuel  Johnson, 
and  Connecticut  gave  four  votes  to  John  Jay,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  Mr.  Pinckney  fell  behind  Mr.  Jefferson, 
the  republican  candidate,  who  was  elected  vice-presi- 
dent.* 

At  the  time  of  the  choice  of  presidential  electors  in 
New-York,  the  republican  party  must  have  been  much 
discouraged  and  disheartened  by  the  result  of  the  recent 

*  As  I  shall  have  occasion  again  to  refer  to  this  election,  I  will  here  give  the  ro 
suit  of  the  presidential  canvass,  as  ascertained  in  congress,  Feb.  8,  1797. 

Adams.  Jeffenon.  Pinckney.  Burr.  S.  Adams.  Clinton. 

Tennessee, —  3  —              3  —  — 

Kentucky, —  4  —               4  —  — 

Georgia, —  4  —  —  —  4 

S.Carolina, —  8  e  —  —  — 

N.Carolina, 1  11  1               6  —  — 

Virginia, 1  20  1                 1  16  — 

Maryland, 7  4  4               3  —  — 

Delaware, 3  —  3  —  —  — 

Pennsylvania, 1  14  2  13  —  — 

New-Jersey, 7  —  7  —  —  — 

New-York, 12  —  12  —  —  — 

Connecticut,  o, 9  —  4  —  —  — 

Rhode  Island,  6, ••••        4  —  _  _  _ 

Massachusetts,  c,-- •       16  —  13  —  —  — 

Vermont, 4  —  4  —  —  — 

New-Hampshire,  d,-        6  —  —  —  —  — 

71  68  63  30  13  4 

•.  John  Jay,  4  votes.    6.  Oliver  Ellsworth,  4.    c.  S.  Johnson,  2.    d.  Oliver  B)l 
worth,  & 


4f  » 

X796.  OF    NEW-YORK.  103 

election,  and  it  is  not  probable  that  any  considerable  inter- 
est was  felt  in  the  selection  of  candidates,  either  for  presi- 
dent or  vice-president.  There  can,  however,  be  little 
doubt  but  that  they  were  unanimous  in  their  desire  that 
Mr.  Jefferson  should  be  elected  president,  and  that  Geo. 
Clinton  was  their  favorite  candidate  for  the  vice-presiden- 
cy, however  faint  might  be  their  hopes  of  success.  The 
result  of  the  canvass  proves,  that  the  democratic  party  m 
the  nation,  had  not,  as  a  party,  fixed  upon  any  individual 
as  their  candidate  for  vice-president.  Col.  Burr,  being  at 
that  time  in  the  senate  of  the  U.  S.,  and  in  habits  of  daily 
intercourse  with  the  southern  republicans,  received  the 
greatest  number  of  the  democratic  votes,  but  the  votes  of 
Georgia  were  given  to  gov.  Clinton,  and  fifteen  of  the 
votes  of  Virginia  were  cast  for  Samuel  Adams  of  Massa- 
chusetts. Before  I  dismiss  this  subject,  I  cannot  help 
remarking,  that,  at  this  early  period,  local  and  sectional 
feelings  seem  to  have  had  an  influence.  It  is  impossible, 
in  any  other  way,  to  account  for  the  fact  that  Mr.  Adams 
received  but  two  votes  south  of  the  Potomac,  and  that  Mr. 
Jefferson  obtainedbut  eighteen  votes, (and  those  were  from 
Penn.  and  Maryland,)  north  of  that  river  ;  and  that  this 
took  place,  notwithstanding  the  election  was  so  very 
close, — the  majority  for  Mr.  Adams  being  only  three. 

The  legislature,  early  in  the  session,  proceeded  to 
choose  presidential  electors.  All  of  them,  were  of  course, 
federalists,  and  they,  therefore,  gave  the  twelve  votes  of 
the  state  of  New-York,  to  Mr.  Adams,  and  Mr.  Thomas 
Pinckney  of  South  Carolina. 

Mr.  Rufus  King  had  been  recently  appointed  minister 
to  London,  which  left  his  seat  in  the  U.  S.  senate  vacant. 
It  therefore  became  necessary  to  appoint  a  successor. 
The  two  houses  thereupon  elected  to  that  office  John  Law- 
rence. What  were  the  peculiar  circumstances  which  in- 
duced this  gentleman's  election,  I  have  never  been  in- 


104  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1796. 

formed.  He  had,  I  believe,  served  in  the  army  of  the 
revolution,  as  colonel  of  a  regiment,  and,  after  the  peace, 
had  devoted  himself  to  the  practice  of  law  in  the  city  of 
New-York,  and  was,  at  the  time  of  his  election,  an  U.  S. 
judge  of  the  district  of  New-York. 

On  the  11th  Nov.  the  legislature  adjourned  to  meet  at 
the  city  of  Albany,  on  the  3d  of  January,  and  on  that  day 
accordingly,  the  two  houses  convened  at  Albany.  On  the 
13th  January,  1797,  the  assembly  chose  the  following 
gentlemen  members  of  the  council  of  appointment,  for  the 
ensuing  year  :  Andrew  Onderdonk,  Ambrose  Spencer, 
Leonard  Gansevoort,  and  Thomas  Morris,  all  federalists. 

A  law  was  passed  this  year,  creating  the  office  of  comp- 
troller. This  bill  transferred  the  powers  and  duties  of 
the  auditor  to  the  comptroller,  and  conferred  on  the  latter 
officer  other  powers,  and  required  of  him  the  performance 
of  other  duties.  It  was  evidently  the  intention  of  the  fra- 
mers  of  the  constitution,  that  the  treasurer  should  be  the 
great  financial  officer  of  the  government  j  hence,  the  ex- 
treme caution  in  relation  to  the  frequency,  and  manner  of 
his  appointment.  But  the  law  creating  a  comptroller,  of 
which  Mr.  Jones  seems  to  have  been  the  principal  author, 
and  the  subsequent  acts  of  the  legislature,  in  connexion 
with  the  natural  working  of  the  governmental  machinery, 
have  constituted  the  comptroller  the  great  state  officer  ; 
and  the  treasurer  has  become  a  mere  clerk  to  the  comp- 
troller :  a  nominal  keeper  of  the  funds  of  the  state,  which 
are  managed  and  disbursed  under  the  direction  of  the 
comptroller.  On  the  industry,  capacity,  and  integrity 
of  that  officer,  the  prosperity  of  the  state  is  more  depend- 
ant than  any  single  officer  of  the  government,  whether 
such  officer  is  created  by  the  appointing  power  or  by  the 
election  of  the  people.  After  the  adjournment  of  the 
legislature.  Gen.  Banker,  treasurer,  resigned  his  office  as 


1797.]  or    NEW- YORK.  105 

treasurer.  Mr.  Samuel  Jones  of  the  senate,  was  appointed 
by  the  council  of  appointment,  the  first  comptroller. 

The  county  of  Delaware,  was  this  year  erected  from  the 
counties  of  Otsego  and  Ulster,  with  the  right  of  sending  two 
members  to  the  legislature,  A  law  also  was  passed  fixing 
permanently  the  seat  of  government  in  the  city  of  Albany, 
and  measures  were  taken  for  the  erection  of  public  build- 
ings, for  the  accommodation  of  the  state  officers. 

The  term  of  service  of  Aaron  Burr  in  the  senate  of  the 
United  States,  expired  this  year,  and  on  the  31st  of  March, 
three  days  before  the  adjournment  of  the  legislature,  they 
elected  Gen.  Philip  Schuyler  to  that  office.  This  evidence 
of  continued  confidence  on  the  part  of  his  friends,  must 
have  been  extremely  grateful  to  his  feelings,  after  he  had 
been  beaten  in  the  manner  I  have  before  related,  by  Col. 
Burr.  It  is  evident  that  the  General,  appreciated  with 
great  sensibility,  this  appointment  j  for,  on  the  occasion, 
he  delivered  a  short  address  to  the  legislature.  His 
speech  evinced  much  good  feeling,  and  was,  rather  unu- 
sual for  him,  conciliatory  in  manner  and  matter.  He  said 
he  had  been  forty  years  in  the  public  service,  and  had  de- 
termined to  retire  to  private  life  when  his  term  in  the  state 
senate  should  expire,  but  that  the  recent  appointment  and 
the  manner  in  which  it  had  been  conferred  on  him,  impo- 
sed on  him  an  obligation  to  forego  his  private  inclinations. 
He  stated  that  his  feelings  were  ardent  in  support  of  his 
political  principles  ;  but  he  declared  that  he  retained  no 
unkind  impressions  against  those  who  differed  from  him 
in  opinion,  in  relation  to  public  men  or  measures,  and  he 
trusted  that  his  opponents  entertained  corresponding 
friendly  sentiments  towards  him.  He  concluded  with  an 
ardent  and  patriotic  prayer  for  Llie  preservation  of  our  civil 
institutions,  and  for  the  prosperity  of  the  state. 

Indications  began  to  be  exhibited,  in  various  parts  of 
this  state,  of  jealousy  and  dissatisfaction  respecting  the 


106  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1797. 

manner  in  which  the  national  concerns  were  managed  ; 
particularly  in  respect  to  our  foreign  affairs,  and  especially 
in  relation  to  the  French  republic.  The  congressional 
election  which  took  place  in  December,  1796,  had  termi- 
nated more  favorable  to  the  republican  party  than  had 
been  anticipated.  Edward  Livingston  had  been  re-elected 
from  New-York  ;  J.  N.  Havens  from  Suffolk  ;  Lucas  El- 
mendorff  from  Ulster,  and  Philip  Van  Cortland  from 
Westchester,  all  republicans,  notwithstanding  they  respec- 
tively encountered  a  zealous  opposition  from  the  fede- 
ralists. 

In  the  city  of  New-York,  on  the  6th  February,  1796,  a 
grand  celebration  of  the  ninth  anniversary  of  the  treaty 
of  alliance  between  France  and  America,  was  held, 
attended  by  many  distinguished  republican  citizens  of 
New-York,  and  also  by  a  considerable  number  of  French 
citizens.  The  meeting,  it  is  said,  was  eloquently  addressed 
by  Brockholts  Livingston.  The  toasts  drank  on  the  occa- 
sion, may  be  considered  as  indicating  the  feelings  of  the 
company.  On  the  subject  of  the  president  and  the  na- 
tional government,  they  were  silent.  One  of  the  regular 
toasts  was,  "  The  British  Treaty — May  it  be  an  awful 
lesson  how  to  trust  to  the  justice  and  magnanimity  of 
those  who  ever  have,  and  still  do  seek,  the  ruin  of  our 
commerce,  and  destruction  of  our  liberty." 

The  celebrated  JVapper  Tandy  gave  for  a  toast — "  The 
virtuous  citizens  of  New-York,  who,  despite  of  British  in- 
fluence, returned  their  faithful  representative  to  congress." 

By  Chancellor  Livingston — "  May  the  present  coolness 
between  France  and  America,  produce,  like  the  quarrels 
of  lovers,  a  renewal  of  love." 

It  will  be  recollected,  that  Chancellor  Livingston,  at 
the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  constitution,  was  an  ardent 
federalist ;  and,  I  now  add,  that  it  is  very  doubtful 
•whether,  without  his  eloquence  and  personal  influence, 


1797.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  107 

the  Poughkeepsie  convention  would  have  adopted  it.  He 
continued  to  act  with  the  federalists  for  some  time  after- 
wards, and  was  politically  opposed  to  Gov.  Clinton 
and  his  party.  A  little  before  the  period  of  which  I  am 
now  speaking,  he  and  his  immediate  connexions,  known 
as  the  "  Livingston  family^^  shifted  their  position,  and 
took  ground  in  opposition  to  the  state  and  national  admin- 
istrations. What  were  the  causes  which  produced  a 
change  in  the  politics  of  the  chancellor  1  and  at  what 
time  did,  that  change  take  place  1  Being  myself  unable 
to  solve  these  questions,  I  caused  the  inquiry  to  be  made 
of  a  neighbor  and  cotemporary  of  Mr.  Livingston,  though 
some  years  his  junior,  and  who  for  a  long  time  held  with 
distinguished  ability,  a  high  office  under  the  government 
of  this  state.  His  reply  was,  "  The  chancellor  changed 
in  1790.  The  ostensible  cause  was,  his  opposition  to  the 
views  of  Mr.  Hamilton,  as  contained  in  his  reports  as  sec- 
retary of  the  treasury,  particularly  those  in  relation  to  the 
funding  of  the  national  debt,  and  in  favor  of  a  national 
bank.  The  real  cause  was  supposed  to  be  disappointment 
in  not  being  appointed  chief  justice  of  the  United  States." 
It  is  proper  to  add,  that  this  information  is  derived  from 
an  ardent  friend  of  Gen.  Hamilton,  and  of  course,  an  op- 
ponent of  the  chancellor.  I  have  since  been  informed 
that  the  family  one  evening  had  a  meeting  for  the  pur- 
pose of  deliberating  on  the  subject,  and  that  the  result  of 
their  deliberations  was  such,  that  the  next  morning  every 
member  of  it  took  a  position  in  the  ranks  of  the  republican 
party.  It  is,  however,  to  be  remarked,  that  some  of  the 
Livingstons  who  resided  in  Columbia  county,  did  not 
change  with  the  chancellor,  but  continued  their  adherence 
to  the  federal  party.  Chancellor  Livingston  was  one  of 
the  most  eloquent  men  of  his  day.  He  possessed  talents 
highly  respectable  as  a  lawyer  and  statesman,  though 
perhaps  he  may  have  been  defective  in  that  intense,  per- 


108  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1797. 

severing  application  to  study,  absolutely  necessary  in. 
order  to  enable  the  most  gifted  individual  to  sustain  and 
retain  a  high  standing  among  the  legal  profession  as  a 
jurist.  His  manners  were  said  to  be  exceedingly  agreeable 
and  fascinating.  He  was,  as  we  have  seen,  one  of  the 
most  efficient  agents  in  procuring  the  adoption  of  the 
constitution.  But  in  the  selection  of  the  great  officers  of 
the  general  government,  the  heads  of  departments,  the 
supreme  judiciary,  and  foreign  embassies,  he  had  been 
wholly  overlooked.  Is  it  wonderful  that  he  should  have 
been  dissatisfied  1  How  is  this  neglect  of  the  chancellor, 
with  his  shining  talents,  his  fascinating  address,  and  pow- 
erful family  connexions,  to  be  accounted  for  7  Was  it 
owing  to  the  personal  jealousy  of  Gen.  Hamilton  7 — Be 
the  cause  of  that  and  his  political  change,  what  it  may,  it 
is  obvious  that  the  accession  of  the  Livingston  family  to 
the  republican  party,  rendered  that  party  far  more  power- 
ful than  otherwise  it  would  have  been,  and  accelerated,  if 
it  did  not  produce,  their  triumph  over  their  opponents. 

The  general  election  of  April,  1797,  aflforded  an  evi- 
dence that  the  republican  party  were  gaining  ground, 
particularly  in  the  southern  district.  Mr.  L'Hommedieu, 
■who  began  now  to  act  with  the  democracy,  had  been  re- 
turned as  senator  from  that  district. 

In  the  eastern  district,  Messrs.  Van  Vechten,  Ten  Eyck, 
Van  Schoonhoven  and  Clark,  and  in  the  western,  Messrs. 
Phelps,  Thomas  Morris  and  M.  Myers,  all  federalists  were 
elected  senators. 

In  New- York,  the  republican  candidates  were  elected 
by  more  than  an  average  majority  of  one  thousand. 
Among  the  members  elected  from  the  city,  I  find  those  of 
Aaron  Burr,  Samuel  L.  Mitchell,  (the  learned  Doctor 
Mitchell)  and  De  Witt  Clinton.  This  gentleman,  who 
afterwards  became  so  distinguished  in  this  state,  was  the 
son  of  Gen.  James  Clinton,  and  nephew  to  Gov.  George 


1797.1  ®^    NEW-YORK.  109 

Clinton.  He  was  then  about  28  years  old.  He  had  at 
an  early  age  graduated  at  Columbia  College,  with  high 
reputation  for  his  scholastic  attainments,  and  soon  after 
commenced  reading  law  in  the  office  of  Samuel  Jones, 
whom  I  have  several  times  mentioned  as  one  of  the  most 
efficient  members  of  the  legislature. 

Mr.  Clinton  did  not,  however,  complete  his  studies 
without  some  interruption.  In  consequence  of  the  death  of 
an  elder  brother,  who  was  private  secretary  to  the  gover- 
nor, he  was  pursuaded  to  relinquish  for  a  time  his  legal 
studies,  and  officiate  in  the  office  which  had  become  va- 
cant by  his  brother's  death.  This  was  in  the  midst  of  the 
heat  of  debate  on  the  subject  of  the  adoption  of  the  federal 
constitution.  He  took  side  in  that  controversy  with  his 
uncle,  the  governor,  and  though  young,  was  one  of  the 
ablest  newspaper  writers  in  opposition  to  those  who  ad- 
vocated the  adoption  of  the  constitution.  When,  in  1795, 
Mr.  Jay  was  elected  governor,  Mr.  Clinton  was  relieved 
from  every  public  employment,  and  again  resorted  to  the 
study  and  practice  of  law  in  the  city  of  New-York.  Al- 
though he  was  distinctly  known  as  a  member  of  the  re- 
publican party,  and  an  active  one,  and  notwithstanding 
he  had  written  and  said  much  against  the  federal  constitu- 
tion, yet  after  that  instrument  had  become  the  supreme 
law  of  the  land  he  manifested  his  determination,  and 
urged  his  friends  to  support  it  in  good  faith.  He  also 
was  far  from  tolerating  or  apologizing  for  the  insolent 
conduct  of  the  French  government  towards  this  country, 
or  the  impertinent  and  officious  intermeddling  of  Mr.  Ge- 
net, and  other  French  agents,  with  our  domestic  affairs, 
and  with  the  opinions  of  the  American  people.  Hence 
some  leading  federalists  in  New- York  entertained  strong 
hopes  that  he  would  abandon  the  republican  party;  and  I 
have  heard  it  asserted  that  Gen.  Hamilton  had  expressed 
an  opinion  that  Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  would  ultimately  be 


110  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1793. 

identified  with  the  federal  party.     Nothing  material  oc 
curred  during  the  recess  of  the  legislature. 

The  legislature  elected  in  April,  1797,  met  at  Albany 
on  the  2d  January,  1798.  In  the  assembly,  one  hundred 
and  one  members  appeared  and  took  their  seats,  and 
Derick  Ten  Eyck  was  chosen  speaker,  against  Mr.  Wil- 
liam Duning,  by  a  vote  of  fifty-nine  to  forty-two.  This 
seemed  to  have  been  a  clear  party  vote,  and  therefore  ex- 
hibits the  strength  of  the  parties  during  that  session  in  the 
assembly.  The  governor,  in  his  speech,  confined  himself 
to  such  domestic  affairs  and  regulations  of  the  state  as  in 
his  judgment  demanded  the  attention  of  the  legislature. 
His  address  was  judicious,  and,  as  usual,  able  ;  but  he 
carefully  avoided  any  allusion  to  the  political  topics  in 
controversy  between  the  two  parties. 

On  the  3d  of  January,  the  assembly  proceeded  to 
nominate  a  council  of  appointment ;  and  Ezra  L'Homme- 
dieu,  William  Thompson,  Moses  Vail,  and  Joseph  White 
were  chosen. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  session,  Mr.  Spencer  raised  a 
question  whether  the  incumbent  of  the  office  of  comptrol- 
ler could,  with  propriety,  hold  a  seat  in  the  senate,  by  in- 
troducing a  resolution  that  the  seat  of  Samuel  Jones  be 
declared  vacant,  in  consequence  of  his  acceptance  of  the 
office  of  comptroller.  This  resolution  elicited  conside- 
rable debate,  but  it  was  finally  negatived  by  a  large  ma- 
jority. 

Gen.  Schuyler,  by  a  written  communication,  asked 
and  obtained  leave  to  resign  his  office  as  senator  in  the 
senate  of  the  United  States,  and  on  the  12th  of  January, 
the  two  houses  nominated  and  appointed  John  Sloss  Ho- 
bart,  one  of  the  judges  of  the  supreme  court,  his  suc- 
cessor. 

Judge  Hobart  soon  afterwards  addressed  a  letter  of 
some  length  to  the  legislature.     In  this  communication  he 


1798.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  Ill 

states  that  Ae  was  not  bred  to  the  profession  of  law,  that 
he  accepted  the  office  when  the  supreme  court  was  first 
organized,  and  had  held  it  for  twenty  years  j  that  the 
salary,  for  a  considerable  part  of  the  time,  had,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  extreme  pecuniary  embarrassments  of  the 
state,  been  insufficient  to  defray  the  expenses  of  his  fami- 
ly J  that  with  a  view  of  adding  to  his  means  of  living,  he 
purchased  a  farm,  for  which  he  was  utterly  unable  to  pay; 
and  in  conclusion  he  states  that  he  accepts  the  office  of 
senator  in  the  full  confidence  that  "  the  legislature  of  his 
own  state  will  not  suffer  an  old  servant  to  drink  of  the 
bitter  cup  of  poverty  and  distress  in  the  evening  of  his 
life." 

It  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  a  man  who  had  not 
studied  the  law  as  a  profession,  should  have  been  selected 
for  a  judge  of  the  supreme  court.  Eut  then,  we  are  to 
recollect  that  he  was  appointed  in  1777,  during  the  most 
perilous  period  of  the  revolutionary  war;  that  able  whig 
lawyers  were  then  rarely  to  be  found  ;  and  that  probably 
patriotism,  integrity  and  sound  discretion  and  judgment 
were  more  sought  after,  and  in  fact,  in  those  times  more 
needed,  than  high  legal  attainments. 

There  are  no  reports  of  adjudications  of  the  supreme 
court  while  Judge  Hobart  sat  as  one  of  its  members  j  but 
from  a  letter  written  by  him  to  Gov.  Jay  in  1795,  on  the 
subject  of  the  governor's  thanksgiving  proclamation,  (1 
Jay^  386,)  it  may  be  inferred  that  he  was  a  man  of  wit, 
and  a  scholar. 

The  fact  that  Judge  Hobart  was  not  bred  a  lawyer  ac- 
counts for  the  appointment  of  Robert  Yates  chief  justice, 
when  Hobart  was  the  senior  judge. 

Shortly  after  the  communication  of  Judge  Hobart  to  the 
legislature,  of  which  I  have  been  speaking,  was  received, 
a  motion  was  made  that  some  pecuniary  provisions  should 
be  made  for  him,  and  also  for  the  Chief  Justice,  Yates, 


112  POLITICAL    HISTORY.  [1798. 

whose  term  of  office  was  about  to  expire,  but  nothing  ef- 
fectual was  done  on  the  subject. 

The  expiration  of  the  term  of  office  of  Chief  Justice 
Yates,*  and  the  resignation  of  Judge  Hobart  produced 
two  vacancies  on  the  bench  of  the  supreme  court. 

In  the  month  of  February,  James  Kent,  then  recorder 
of  New-York,  was  appointed  to  supply  one  of  the  vacan- 
cies, and  John  Lansing,  Junior,  was  appointed  chief  justice; 
but  no  appointment  of  a  fifth  judge  was  made  until  the 
9th  of  August  following,  when  John  Cozine  was  appoint- 
ed. He,  however,  died  within  a  very  short  time  after  his 
appointment,  and  on  the  27th  December,  1798,  Jacob 
Radcliflf,  then  assistant  attorney  general  for  the  counties 
of  Dutchess,  Ulster  and  Orange,  was  appointed  in  place 
of  the  deceased  judge. 

During  this  session,  Robert  McClellan,  who  afterwards 
became  a  defaulter,  was  appointed  state  treasurer. 

The  office  of  secretary  of  state  became  vacant  by  the 
death  of  Mr.  Scott,  and  Major  Daniel  Hale  of  Albany,  was 
appointed  to  that  office.  This  appointment  was  made 
against  the  wishes  of  Gov.  Jay,  and  in  consequence  of  the 
strenuous  effijrt  of  Doct.  Joseph  White,  a  member  of  the 
council  from  the  western  district.  Gov.  Jay  nominated 
several  persons,  who  were  promptly  rejected  by  the  coun- 
cil, and  at  last  very  reluctantly  nominated  Mr.  Hale. 
Mr.  Hale,  it  is  said,  was  an  excellent  officer,  and  the  go- 
vernor soon  became  convinced  that  his  opposition  to  the 
appointment  was  caused  by  erroneous  impressions,   and 

*  Chief  Justice  Yates  never  afterwards  held  any  office  of  importance.  Although 
not  distinguished  as  a  great  man  or  learned  jurist,  I  have  never  heard  his  integ- 
rity or  impartiality  as  a  judge  impeached.  In  his  temper  and  disposition  he  was 
amiable,  and  his  social  qualities  tendered  him  agreeable  and  interesting  to  all 
classes  in  community.  He  was  likewise  kind  and  generous.  Unhappily  these 
qualities  caused  him  to  be  too  inattentive  to  his  pecuniary  concerns,  and  he  died 
poor.  Upon  his  decease,  his  son,  John  Van  Ness  Yates,  Esquire,  found  his  estate 
insufficient  to  pay  his  debts,  and  afterwards,  as  I  am  informed,  from  his  own 
earnings,  from  filial  affection  and  a  regard  to  the  memory  of  his  father,  very  mnch 
to  bis  own  honor,  paid  all  the  creditors.    Ought  the  state  to  have  permitted  this  I 


1798.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  113 

when  so  convinced  he  lost  no  time  in  communicating  to 
Doct.  White  and  Major  Hale  his  conviction  that  he  was 
well  satisfied  that  he  was  wrong,  and  that  the  friends  of 
Mr.  Hale  were  right. 

After  the  legislature  had  adjourned,  (which  was  on  the 
7th  April,)  Judge  Hobart  was  appointed  by  the  president 
a  district  judge  for  the  district  of  New-York,  and  there- 
upon (the  vacancy  in  the  U.  S.  senate  happening  during 
the  recess  of  the  legislature,)  Gov.  Jay  appointed  Gen. 
William  North  of  Duanesburgh,  to  supply  the  vacancy 
in  the  senate. 

The  electioneering  campaign  was  opened  with  great 
vigor  in  the  winter  of  1798. 

On  the  6th  March,  at  a  very  general  meeting  of  the 
federal  members  of  the  legislature,  and  citizens  from  vari- 
ous parts  of  the  state,  John  Jay  and  Stephen  Van  Rens- 
selaer were  nominated  for  re-election.  Chancellor  Liv- 
ingston was  nominated  by  the  republican  party  in  oppo- 
sition to  Mr.  Jay.  The  republicans  made  no  nomination 
for  lieutenant  governor,  but  I  believe  generally  concur- 
red in  the  support  of  Mr.  Van  Rensselaer.  The  great 
and  well  merited  personal  popularity  of  the  lieutenant 
governor,  probably  induced  this  course. 

Judge  Wm.  Jay  says,  (1  Joy,  400,)  that  "Governor 
Jay  would  gladly  have  retired  from  the  contest,  but  the 
indignities  which  France  was  at  that  time,  heaping 
upon  this  country,  and  the  probability  that  they  would 
soon  lead  to  a  war,  forbade  him  to  consult  only  his  per- 
sonal gratification."  "No  competitor  could,  probably, 
have  been  selected  with  whom  he  would  have  been  more 
reluctant  to  contend,  than  Chancellor  Livingston.  An- 
cient friendship,  and  ancient  associations,  must  have 
rendered  it  peculiarly  painful  to  him,  to  find  in  his  old 
companion  and  fellow  laborer,  a  voluntary  rival."  The 
subsequent  conduct  of  Gov.  Jay,  renders  it  extremely 

8 


114  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1798. 

probable  that  this  opinion  of  Judge  Jay,  in  relation  to 
the  motives  and  desires  of  his  father,  is  correct. 

Although  some  of  the  unpopular  measures  of  the  ad- 
ministration of  Mr.  Adams,  had  been  adopted,  and  had 
been  met  by  strong  and  vigorous  opposition  by  the  lead- 
ing democrats  in  this  state,  as  well  as  in  other  states  of  the 
Union,  particularly  the  southern,  yet  sufficient  time  had 
not  elapsed  to  enable  the  great  mass  of  the  yeomanry 
of  the  country  to  become  so  well  acquainted  with  the 
merits  and  demerits  of  the  federal  administration,  as  to 
prepare  them  to  pronounce  a  judgement  of  condemna- 
tion ;  and  the  offensive  conduct  of  Genet,  and  the  atti- 
tude assumed  by  the  French  republic  towards  the  Amer- 
ican government,  induced  a  majority  of  the  people  of 
this  state  to  support,  for  the  present  the  national  admin- 
istration, and  of  course,  to  sustain  the  re-election  of  Gov. 
Jay,  in  the  purity  of  whose  motives  all  men  had  unlimited 
confidence.  He  was  therefore  elected  by,  at  that  time, 
the  large  majority  of  two  thousand  three  hundred  and 
eighty  votes. 


1798.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  115 


CHAPTER    V. 

FROM  MAY  I,  1798,  TO  MA.Y  1,  1801. 

Although  Gov.  Jay  had  been  re-elected  by  a  triumphant 
majority,  the  election  evinced  that  the  republican  party 
was  the  rising  party  in  the  state.  In  the  southern  district, 
De  Witt  Clinton  and  David  Gelston  were  elected  to  the 
senate  ;  Ambrose  Spencer,  John  Schenck  and  Ebenezer 
Foote,from  the  middle  ;  Leonard  Gansevoort,  John  Frey 
and  John  Saunders,  from  the  eastern,  and  William  Beeke- 
man,  Frederick  Getman  and  Thomas  R.  Gold,  from  the 
western  district,  were  returned  members  of  the  senate. 
The  city  of  New-York  again  returned  republican  members 
of  the  assembly,  among  whom,  were  Aaron  Burr  and 
John  Swartwout.  Washington  county  also  elected  demo- 
cratic members  of  the  assembly,  in  despite  of  the  strenuous 
exertions  of  Gen.  John  Williams,  who  had  changed  from 
a  zealous  democrat  to  a  most  heated  federalist.  He  was 
the  federal  candidate  for  congress,  from  the  district  com- 
posed of  Washington,  Clinton  and  Saratoga  counties,  but 
was  beaten  by  Judge  Thompson  of  Saratoga,  who  was 
the  republican  candidate. 

Several  gentlemen,  who  afterwards  made  a  distinguished 
figure  in  the  democratic  party,  this  year  made  their  first 
appearance  in  public  life,  in  the  assembly.  Among  them 
may  be  mentioned,  David  Thomas,  of  the  county  of  Wash- 
ington, Erastus  Root,  of  the  county  of  Delaware,  Archi- 
bald Mclntyre,  of  the  county  of  Montgomery,  Obadiah 
German,  of  the  county  of  Chenango,  and  Jedediah  Peck, 
of  the  county  of  Otsego.  Mr.  Peck  had  been  elected  as  a 
federalist,  or  rather,  strictly  speaking,  the  federal  partv  in 
that  county  could  hardly  be  said  at  that  time,  to  have  had 


116  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1798. 

any  opposition,  but  in  the  course  of  the  session,  he  gen- 
erally acted  with  the  republicans,  and  finally  became  iden- 
tified with  that  party. 

The  year  which  succeeded  the  election,  in  April,  1798, 
was  one  of  unusual,  perhaps  unsurpassed,  political  excite- 
ment in  the  United  States  ;  but  in  no  state  was  party  heat 
more  intense  than  in  the  state  of  New- York.  All  the  old 
animosities  which  were  generated  in  1788,  and  had  been 
smothered  for  ten  years,  burst  forth  into  a  flame.  This 
excitement  was  mainly  produced  by  the  measures  of  the 
general  government.  The  friends  of  the  administration 
of  Mr.  Adams  were  openly  charged  with  palpable  and  al- 
most treasonable  partiality  for  the  British  government, 
and  with  attempting  by  construction  to  invest  the  national 
government  with  powers  not  intended  to  be  conferred  on 
them  by  the  constitution,  and  finally  to  subvert  our  free 
institutions  and  establish  in  lieu  thereof,  if  not  in  name  in 
spirit,  a  limited  monarchical  government  similar  to  that 
of  Great  Britain.  These  charges  may  seem  to  us  at  this 
day,  entirely  extravagant,  and  as  having  originated  either 
from  an  over  heated  disordered  imagination,  or  from  a  de- 
sign to  impose  on  the  less  informed  part  of  the  community 
by  false  representations  and  unfounded  alarms,  with  a 
view  to  accomplish  electioneering  purposes,  and  projects 
of  self  aggrandizement.  But  in  my  judgement,  we  should 
do  injustice  to  a  large  portion  of  the  intelligent  and  best 
informed  part  of  the  republicans,  who  led  on  the  attack 
upon  the  federal  administration,  in  arriving  at  such  a  con- 
clusion. To  prove  the  correctness  of  this  opinion,  it  will 
be  necessary  slightly  to  glance  at  the  principles  and  move- 
ments of  the  two  great  national  parties  of  that  day.  It 
cannot  be  denied  but  that  many  of  the  most  intelligent  of 
the  federalists,  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  United 
States  constitution,  believed  that  a  pure  representative 
government,  as  contemplated  by  that  instrument,  could 


1798.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  117 

not  be  sustained  by  any  community  on  earth.  They 
therefore  looked  for  a  change  to  be  produced  either  by 
physical  force,  that  is  by  a  revolutiouj  or  by  gradual  and 
almost  insensible  innovations,  to  be  effected  by  those  who 
should  administer  the  government ;  and  the  latter  course 
was,  from  various  and  important  considerations,  to  be  pre- 
ferred. I  have  no  doubt  that  a  large  majority  of  those 
men  who  thus  thought  and  judged  were  honest  in  their 
opinions.  Why  should  it  be  otherwise  1  A  representative 
democracy  was  entirely  novel.  The  ancient  republics 
were  either  real  aristocracies  or  democracies.  In  the  latter 
case,  the  people,  instead  of  acting  by  their  representatives, 
acted  in  masses.  Such  were  some  of  the  ancient  Grecian 
republics.  These  communities  were,  after  a  short  time, 
always  misled  by  designing  demagogues,  and  soon  lost 
their  liberties. 

In  Rome,  the  government  was  partly  aristocratic  and 
partly  democratic.  The  democratic  branch  of  the  govern- 
ment gradually  gained  ground  and  encroached  on  the 
aristocratic,  until  the  senate  entirely  lost  its  authority  and 
power.  The  democracy  soon  became  a  prey  to  the  ambi- 
tious projects  of  designing  and  corrupt  demagogues.  The 
result  was,  that  the  Roman  people,  who  were  masters  of 
the  world,  became  themselves  the  slaves  of  a  single  despot. 
The  more  recent  Italian  and  Dutch  republics,  (so  called,) 
were  generally,  properly  speaking,  mere  oligarchies  ;  and 
were  so  distracted  by  factions,  caused  by  the  ambitious 
projects  of  individuals,  or  created  by  the  corrupt  influence 
of  neighboring  and  more  powerful  governments,  as  to  af- 
ford a  feeble  protection  to  the  private  rights  and  personal 
liberty  of  the  citizen,  and  an  extremely  unsafe  and  uncer- 
tain guaranty  of  national  independence.  The  government 
of  nearly  all  the  American  states,  while  colonies,  had  been 
partially  created  by  the  hereditary  executive  and  royal 
authority  of  Great  Britain.     The  little  colonies  of  Connec- 


118  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1798. 

ticut  and  Rhode-Island  furnished  the  only  instances  of  the 
existence  of  civil  society,  for  any  considerable  period  of 
time,  under  a  representative  governmentj  and  these  were 
in  factj  in  their  infancy,  and  always  had  acted  under  the 
tutelage  of  the  mother  country.  It  is  an  old  maxim,  "  that 
what  has  been,  will  be."  Is  it  then,  matter  of  astonish- 
ment, that  reflecting  men,  reading  men,  and  honest  men, 
should  have  despaired  of  effecting  that  in  this  country, 
which  had  never  been  effected  in  any  age  or  by  any  coun- 
try on  this  globe  1  I  rather  wonder  that  men  were  found 
bold  enough  to  venture  on  this  new  experiment,  and  to 
disregard  these  doubts  and  apprehensions.  Thank  God, 
there  were  such  men  ;  among  whom  Thomas  Jefferson, 
Benjamin  Franklin,  George  Clinton,  and  Samuel  Adams, 
stand  pre-eminent.  Thank  God,  too,  that  they  were  sus 
tained  by  the  mass  of  mind  in  the  United  States.  The 
men  who  were  known  to  have  entertained  these  doubts  of 
the  capacity  of  man  for  self-governmentj  stood  in  the  front 
ranks,  and  were  the  leaders  of  the  federalism  of  1798. 
General  Hamilton  had,  as  we  have  seen,  avowed  his  prin- 
ciples frankly  and  fully,  in  the  national  convention,  in 
favor  of  a  government  which,  in  effect,  would  have  been 
a  limited  monarchy,  and,  in  his  letter  to  Timothy  Picker- 
ing, (see  page  14,)  at  a  later  day,  he  intimates  that  he 
yielded  to  the  adoption  of  the  constitution  because  the 
prejudices  of  the  people  in  favor  of  a  republican  govern- 
ment were  so  strong  that  it  seemed  necessary  to  "  try  the 
experiment,''^  Even  the  pure  minded  and  patriotic  John 
Jay  in  his  letter  to  Gen.  Washington,  dated  March  7, 1787, 
(1  Jay^  256,)  on  the  subject  of  the  form  of  government, 
which  in  his  judgement  ought  to  be  adopted  by  the  Uni- 
ted States,  says,  "  Shall  we  have  a  King  1  Not  in  my 
opinion,  while  other  experiments  remain  untried.  Might 
we  not  have  a  governor  general  limited  in  his  prerog- 
ative   and  duration  %     Might   not    congress    be  divided 


1798.1  OF    KEW-YOEK.  119 

into  an  upper  and  lower  house,  the  former  appointed  for 
life,  the  latter  annually.  *  *  *  What  powers  should  be 
granted  to  the  government  so  constituted  1  is  a  question 
which  deserves  much  thought.  I  think  the  more  the  bet- 
ter ;  the  states  retaining  only  so  much  as  may  he  necessary 
for  domestic  purposes j  and  all  their  principal  officers ^  civil 
and  military^  being  commissioned  and  removable  by  the 
national  government.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  this  let- 
ter was  written  to  General  Washington,  the  man  first  in 
influence  in  the  nation,  and  that  in  his  answer  he  expressed 
no  suprise  at  the  propositions  made  by  Mr.  Jay. 

Is  it,  then,  a  matter  of  surprise  that  the  populace  should 
have  been  alarmed  when  the  stamp  duty,  the  very  mea- 
sure which  had  induced  them  to  rebel  against  Great  Bri- 
tain, was  fixed  upon  them  by  congress  ? 

I  ought  to  have  mentioned  that  so  late  as  1798,  lead- 
ing federalists  were  in  the  habit,  in  their  verbal  commu- 
nications, of  declaring  their  convictions  that  our  democra- 
tic institutions  could  not  long  subsist. 

Is  it  at  all  surprising  that  enlightened  and  highly  intel- 
ligent men  of  the  republican  party,  when  they  perceived 
that  Gen.  Hamilton  and  Gov.  Jay  were  the  dispensers  of 
governmental  patronage  in  this  state,  when  they  found 
that  that  patronage  was  almost  exclusively  bestowed  on 
those  who  declared  themselves  in  favor  of  a  strong  and 
energetic  government,  as  it  was  called,  when  the  general 
goverment  had  adopted  a  system  of  internal  taxation  which 
immensely  increased  its  patronage  j  when  a  standing  army 
in  time  of  peace  had  been  raisedj  when  congress  had  con- 
ferred on  the  president  the  power  to  borrow  money,  leav- 
ing him  unlimited  in  his  discretion  as  to  the  rate  of  interest 
to  be  paid  j  when  the  same  authority  had  vested  the  presi- 
dent with  arbitrary  control  over  the  persons  of  aliens,  and 
when  a  law  had  been  passed,  rendering  it  highly  penal  to 
speak  or  write  any  thing  tending  to  bring  odium  and  con- 


120  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1798. 

tempt  on  the  president  or  upon  his  administration,  or  upon 
congress,  and  especially  when  under  this  act,  they  saw  a 
member  of  congress  confined  for  four  months  in  a  dungeon, 
principally  for  charging  Mr.  Adams  with  living  in  a  sump- 
tous  and  princely  style  ;  is  it,  I  say,  at  all  surprising  that 
intelligent  and  consciencious  men  should  have  honestly 
entertained  serious  apprehensions,  if  not  a  firm  belief  that 
those  men  w^ho  had  all  along  declared  their  opinion  that 
a  free  representative  government  could  not  be  sustained, 
they  being  the  very  men  who  were  suppose^l  to  hold  a 
controling  influence  in  the  administration  of  Mr.  Adams, 
intended  the  subversion  of  our  free  institutions,  and  were 
taking  measures  to  accomplish  that  intention  1 

While,  therefore,  I  award  to  the  great  body,  even  of 
the  leading  federalists  of  ninety-eight,  honest  and  pure 
motives,  I  insist  that  upright  and  well  informed  republi- 
cans had  good  reasons  to  believe,  and  did  sincerely  believe 
that  a  gradual  subversion  of  the  free  principles  of  the  con- 
stitution was  in  progress  by  those  who  administered  the  go- 
vernment. Another  circumstance  which  at  this  time  added 
unusual  bitterness  to  party  controversies  was,  that  unfortu- 
nately for  the  federal  party,  nearly  all  the  tories  of  the  re- 
volution then  living,  joined  them.  This  view  of  the  mate- 
rials of  which  that  party  was  composed,  connected  with  the 
sympathy  felt  by  the  Americans  generally  for  the  French, 
produced  an  impression  by  no  means  unnatural,  that  the 
federalists,  as  a  party  were  unreasonably  attached  to  the 
British  and  desired  to  renew  the  connexion  in  some  shape, 
that  formerly  existed  between  the  two  countries. 

It  is  easy  to  perceive,  that  all  these  causes  acting  at  one 
and  the  same  time  in  connexion  with  the  ordinary  causes 
which  impel  to  action  political  partizans,  such  as  person- 
al rivalships,  and  the  keen  appetite  for  power  and  place, 
must  have  rendered  the  contest  from  1798  to  1800  ardent 
to  a  degree  of  which  we  can  scarcely  form  an  adequate 


1798.1  °^    NEW-YORK.  121 

conception.  Soon  after  Governor  Jay  had  taken  the  oath 
of  office  upon  his  second  election,  he  issued  a  proclama- 
tion requiring  an  extraordinary  session  of  the  legislature, 
in  the  month  of  August.  They  met  at  Albany  in  pursu- 
ance of  this  proclamation,  and  Derick  Ten  Broeck  was  cho- 
sen speaker. 

The  result  of  the  mission  to  France  of  Messrs.  Pinck- 
ney,  Gerry  and  Marshal  became  known  in  this  country  in 
the  early  part  of  the  summer  of  this  year,  and  the  vile 
attempt  made  in  the  French  capital  under  the  eye  of  the 
government,  and  evidently  by  their  secret  agents  to  extort 
money  from  the  American  people,  as  the  price  of  a  trea- 
ty with  the  French  republic,  rendered  it  almost  certain  in 
the  view  of  all  well  informed  men  that  a  war  would  be 
the  consequence  of  these  disgraceful  practices. 

The  governor,  in  his  speech  at  the  opening  of  the  ses- 
sion, assigned  as  a  cause  for  the  call  of  the  extra  session, 
the  alarming  indications  of  a  war  with  France,  founded 
principally  on  the  recent  disclosures,  and  the  consequent 
necessity  of  immediate  preparations,  for  defence,  by  re- 
pairing old  and  erecting  new  fortifications,  by  an  efficient 
organization  of  the  militia,  by  replenishing  our  arsenals 
with  arms,  and  warlike  munitions,  and  by  providing  funds 
to  defray  the  expenses  of  these  defensive  measures.  His 
speech  w^as  almost  solely  confined  to  national  affairs,  and 
tended  to  inflame  the  minds  of  his  auditors  against  the 
French,  and  no  doubt  was  intended  by  him  to  produce 
that  effect. 

The  answers  of  the  two  houses  were  responsive  and 
respectful.  They  adopted  some  measures  for  putting  the 
state  in  a  position  of  defence,  but  did  not  enter  into  the 
ordinary  business  of  state  legislation. 

It  will  be  recollected  that  a  vacancy  in  the  United 
States  senate  had  been  created  by  the  resignation  of  Judge 
Hobart,  and  that  Gen.  North  had  been  temporarily  ap- 


122  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1799. 

pointed  to  that  office  during  the  recess.  The  legislature 
therefore  proceeded  to  choose  James  Watson  as  the  suc- 
cessor of  Mr.  Hobart.  John  Tayler,  afterwards  lieuten- 
ant governor,  was  the  democratic  candidate.  In  the  as- 
sembly, Mr.  Watson  received  fifty-seven  votes,  and  Mr. 
Tayler  forty-eight.  This,  probably,  exhibits  the  strength 
of  the  parties  in  that  house  during  the  extra  session  in 
1798. 

This  extra  session  was  adjourned  until  the  2nd  day  of 
January,  1799,  on  which  day  the  legislature  met  at  Albany, 
and  on  the  6th  of  that  month,  the  assembly  proceeded  to 
elect  a  council  of  appointment,  and  Wm.  Dunning  of  the 
southern,  Ebenezer  Foote  of  the  middle,  Ebenezer  Clark 
of  the  eastern,  and  John  Frey  of  the  western  district,  were 
chosen.  Mr.  Dunning  had  forty-nine  votes,  Mr.  Foote 
the  same  number,  Mr.  Clark  had  ninety-two  votes,  and 
Mr.  Frey  ninety-six.  The  opposition  candidates  were 
Mr.  Adison  and  Mr.  Haight,  who  each  had  forty-seven 
votes.  The  eastern  and  w^estern  districts  were  represented 
entirely  by  federal,  and  the  southern  by  democratic  sena- 
tors. This  accounts  for  the  choice  of  Mr.  Dunning,  who 
was  a  republican. 

The  legislature  of  Massachusetts  had  proposed  certain 
amendments  to  the  United  States  constitution,  increasing 
the  disability  of  aliens,  which  were  laid  before  the  New- 
York  legislature  by  Gov.  Jay.  These  amendments  were 
considered  as  partaking  of  a  party  character,  and  were 
freely  discussed  in  the  assembly,  but  were  rejected  by  a 
vote  of  sixty-two  to  thirty-eight. 

On  the  7th  of  February,  Mr,  John  Swartwout  from  New- 
York,  introduced  into  the  assembly  a  resolution  for  the 
appointment  of  a  committee  who  should  be  directed  to 
bring  in  a  bill  dividing  the  state  into  districts,  for  the  elec- 
tion by  the  people,  of  presidential  electors.  This  resolu- 
tion was  afterwards  modified  on  the  motion  of  Judge  Peck, 


1799.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  123 

so  as  to  require  the  committee  to  embrace  in  the  same  bill, 
a  direction  that  each  state  senator  should  be  chosen  by 
single  districts,  and  in  that  shape  the  resolution  passed, 
fifty-five  to  forty.  A  bill  to  that  effect  was  accordingly 
brought  into  the  assembly  and  passed  that  house,  but  was 
rejected  in  the  senate. 

The  republican  members  evidently  anticipated  that  the 
election  in  April,  1800,  would  result  in  a  federal  majority 
in  the  legislature,  and  they  advocated  this  measure  with  a 
view  of  securing  a  part  of  the  electoral  college.  This 
project,  therefore,  among  politicians,  assumed  entirely  a 
party  aspect.  The  choice  of  a  council  of  appointment, 
and  that  of  United  States  senator,  had  shown  a  federal 
majority  in  the  assembly;  how,  then,  was  the  result  last 
mentioned  produced  *?  I  am  informed  by  a  distinguished 
gentleman  now  living,  who  was  then,  though  young,  an 
active  and  decided  republican  member  of  the  assembly, 
that  there  were  at  that  time  some  eight  or  ten  members 
who  had  been  chosen  as  federalists,  but  who  began  to 
question  the  doctrines  of  their  party,  who,  on  all  merely 
personal  questions,  voted  with  the  federalists,  but  on  ques- 
tions involving  measures  and  principles,  they  on  most 
occasions  voted  on  the  democratic  side-  of  these  gentle- 
man, Obadiah  German,  Judge  Peck,  and  Mr.  McKinstry, 
of  Hudson,  were  the  principal.  They  were,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  day,  denominated  trimmers^  an  appellation 
which  the  subsequent  conduct  of  most  of  them,  particu- 
larly Gen.  German  and  Judge  Peck,  did  not  authorize  or 
warrant.  In  the  management  of  these  men,  the  tact  and 
address  of  Col.  Burr  were  peculiarly  useful.  It  was, 
no  doubt,  owing  to  his  contrivance,  that  Judge  Peck  was 
selected  to  bring  in  the  electoral  resolutions.  Judge 
Peck,  although  a  clearheaded  sensible  man,  was  an  uned- 
ucated emigrant  from  Connecticut.  His  appearance  was 
diminutive  and  almost  disgusting.     In   religion  he   was 


124  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1799. 

fanatical,  but  in  his  political  views,  he  was  sincere,  perse- 
vering and  bold;  and  although  meek  and  humble  in  his 
demeanor,  he  was  by  no  means  destitute  of  personal  am- 
bition. He  was  an  itinerant  surveyor  in  the  coimty  of 
Otsego,  then  a  new  and  uncultivated  part  of  the  state. 
He  would  survey  your  farm  in  the  day  time,  exhort  and 
pray  in  your  family  at  night,  and  talk  on  politics  the  rest 
part  of  the  time.  Perhaps  on  Sunday,  or  some  evening 
in  the  week,  he  would  preach  a  sermon  in  your  school 
house.  No  man  knew  better  the  political  importance  of 
such  a  man,  in  a  society  organized  as  the  society  of  the 
western  counties  then  was,  than  CoL  Burr,  and  he  spared 
no  pains  to  cause  Mr.  Peck  to  be  identified  with  the  demo- 
cratic party.  Various  anecdotes  have  been  related  to  me, 
which  exhibit  the  care  w^hich  Col.  Burr  took  to  shape 
trifling  matters  in  such  a  way  as  to  act  on  the  mind  of 
Judge  Peck  and  others,  so  as  to  produce  the  great  result 
at  which  he  aimed.  The  selection  of  Judge  Peck  to  offer 
the  electoral  resolutions  flattered  his  vanity,  it  called  out 
upon  him  the  maledictions  of  leading  federalists,  and  in  that 
way  widened  the  breach  between  him  and  his  old  political 
friends.  Mr.  B.,  it  is  said,  with  equal  skill  and  perseve- 
rance applied  himself  to  Gen.  German,  then  a  plain,  but 
strong  minded,  and  highly  popular  farmer  of  Chenango. 
The  support  of  the  democratic  cause  by  these  two  men, 
was  eventually  of  great  importance  to  the  success  of  the 
republican  party  in  April,  1800.  I  do  not  think  it  too 
much  to  say,  that  had  it  not  been  for  the  papers  circula- 
ted by  Judge  Peck  and  Gen.  German,  and  their  personal 
exertion  and  influence,  the  western  district  in  the  year 
1800,  would  have  been  federal.  Mr.  Cheetham  therefore, 
in  his  pamphlet,  which  he  wrote  some  years  afterwards, 
professing  to  present  a  "  view  "  of  Mr.  Burr's  political 
conduct,  and  in  his  answer  to  Aristides  is  wrong  in  alleg- 
ing that  Col.  Burr,  while  a  member  of  the  assemblv  in 


1799.]  OF    NEW-YOBK.  125 

1798-9,  did  not  act  efficiently  in  support  of  the  republi- 
can interest.  He  probably  effected  more  than  any  other 
individual. 

The  celebrated  resolutions,  drawn  by  Mr.  Madison,  of 
Kentucky  and  Virginia,  denouncing  the  alien  and  sedition 
laws,  and  other  measures  of  Mr.  Adams  were,  by  Gov. 
Jay  communicated  to  our  legislature.  When  the  assem 
bly  was  in  committee  of  the  whole  on  these  resolutions, 
Mr.  King,  a  federalist,  moved  a  resolution  reciting  that 
the  right  of  deciding  on  the  constitutionality  of  all 
laws  belongs  to  the  judiciary  department,  that  the 
assumption  of  that  right  by  the  individual  states,  is 
unwarrantable,  and  tends  to  destroy  the  independence 
of  the  general  government,  &c. — He  therefore,  for  this 
extraordinary  reason,  moved  that  the  committee  of  the 
whole  be  discharged  from  the  further  consideration  of  the 
subject.  At  this  day  the  doctrine  that  members  of  a 
state  legislature  had  not,  constitutionally,  the  right  to  ex- 
press their  opinion  on  the  acts  of  the  general  government 
would  be  regarded  as  too  absurd  to  be  advocated  by  a 
man  of  sane  mind  ;  but  although  the  resolution  of  Mr. 
King  was  ably  and  strenuously  resisted  by  Mr.  Root  and 
others,  it  was  finally  adopted  by  a  vote  of  fifty  to  forty- 
three. 

In  the  senate,  the  same  proceedings  were  had  in  sub- 
stance, and  Mr.  King's  resolution,  together  with  the  pre- 
amble was  adopted  by  a  large  majority,  there  being  only 
seven  votes  against  it.  These  were  Adison,  Dunning, 
L'Hommedieu,  J.  Schenck,  Spencer,  Tappan,  and  Tillot- 
son.  De  Witt  Clinton,  who  was  then  a  member  of  the 
senate,  must  have  been  necesarily  absent.  It  will  be 
seen  that  Judge  Spencer,  who  so  lately  had  been  an  ardent 
friend  of  Gov.  Jay,  and  a  most  zealous  federalist,  is  now 
found  voting  with  the  republican  party.  The  fact  is,  he 
changed  sides  in  the  latter  part  of  the  session  of  1798, 


126  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1799. 

and  not  long  after  Mr.  Jones  was  appointed  comptroller 
It  is  said  he  was  a  candidate  for  that  office.  Hence,  the 
federalists  charged  him  with  abandoning  his  party  in  conse- 
quence of  disappointment,  and  from  feelings  of  resent- 
ment towards  Gov.  Jay.  The  truth  of  this  allegation. 
Judge  Spencer  has  always  denied,  and  has  uniformly 
treated  the  accusation  as  a  calumny.  His  change  of  prin- 
ciples was  known  in  the  spring  of  1798,  and  before  his 
re-election  to  the  senate  from  the  middle  district. 

When  the  president  of  the  United  States  was  inform- 
ed of  the  treatment  by  the  French  directory,  of  Messrs. 
Pinckney,  Marshal  and  Gerry,  he,  in  a  speech  to  congress, 
declared  that  he  never  would  send  another  minister  to 
France  until  he  had  assurance  that  an  American  envoy 
would  be  received  with  the  respect  due  to  a  great,  free 
and  independent  nation.  But  not  long  afterwards,  Mr. 
Adams  having  been  advised  by  Mr.  Vans  Murray,  our 
minister  at  the  Hague,  that  representations  had  been  made 
to  him  by  some  of  the  French  diplomatic  agents,  that 
France  was  still  desirous  to  treat  with  America;  not- 
withstanding his  former  delaration,  he  (Mr.  Adams)  nomi- 
nated to  the  United  States  senate,  Mr.  Vans  Murray,  as 
the  American  envoy  to  the  French  court.  This  step  was 
severely  censured  by  Gen.  Hamilton,  and  many  other 
leading  federalists  in  the  nation,  some  of  whom  probably 
really  desired  a  war  with  France.  Mr.  Swartwout,  how- 
ever, moved  in  the  assembly,  an  address  of  thanks  to  the 
president,  on  account  of  the  appointment  of  Vans  Mur- 
ray, but  the  motion  was  not  sustained  by  a  majority  in 
the  assembly.  The  result  of  this  motion,  shews  the  very 
great  influence  which  the  opinions  of  Gen.  Hamilton  had 
on  his  political  friends  in  the  legislature.  It  seems  to  me 
as  a  question  of  mere  party  policy,  the  federalists  on  this 
occasion  acted  unwisely.  They  should,  themselves,  have 
brought  forward  the   motion  made  by  Mr.   Swartwout. 


1799.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  127 

The  tendency  of  it  would  have  been  to  have  increased  the 
confidence  of  the  people  in  Mr.  Adams,  the  head  of  the 
federal  party,  and  in  his  administration,  but  what  was  of 
still  greater  importance,  it  would  have  diminished  the 
jealousy  felt  by  many  honest,  upright  men,  that  the  fede- 
ralists from  an  overweening  partiality  for  Great  Britain, 
were  determined  on  a  war  with  France  without  regarding 
the  question  whether  there  was  or  was  not  a  sufficient 
cause  for  such  war. 

Judge  Jay,  in  his  biography  of  the  governor,  says  (1 
Jay  392)  that  "  during  the  six  years  of  Gov.  Jay's  admin- 
istration, not  one  individual  was  dismissed  by  him  from  of- 
fice on  account  of  his  politics.  So  long  as  an  officer  dis- 
charged his  duties  with  fidelity  and  ability,  he  was  certain 
of  being  continued,  and  hence  his  devotion  to  the  public, 
became  identified  with  his  personal  interest."  It  is  related 
that  in  the  council,  a  member  was  urging  in  behalf  of  a 
candidate,  his  zeal  and  usefulness  as  a  federalist,  when  he 
was  interrupted  by  the  governor,  with  "  that,  sir,  is  not 
the  question;  is  he  fit  for  the  office  7"     [See  Note  O.] 

These  sentiments  and  principles  of  action  are  truly  no- 
ble, and  in  conformity  with  the  pure  motives  which  always 
governed  the  conduct  of  John  Jay.  But  Judge  Jay  was 
mistaken  in  saying  that  no  person  was  removed  on  account 
of  his  politics,  during  Gov.  Jay's  administration.  I  find 
on  the  minutes  of  the  council,  that  Jacob  John  Lansing 
was  removed  from  the  office  of  sheriff  of  New- York, 
Dec.  28, 1798,  and  James  Morris  was  appointed  to  succeed 
him;  also,  that  on  the  9th  of  March,  1799,  Jedediah  Peck 
was  removed  from  the  office  of  a  judge  of  the  common 
pleas  court  of  Otsego  county,  without  any  cause  of  the 
removal  appearing  on  the  minutes.  These  are  the  first 
cases  I  have  been  able  to  find  since  the  year  1777,  of  re- 
movalsj  unless  the  cause  of  the  removal  was  inserted  on 
the  minutes.     The  accusation  was  in  the  first  place  en- 


128  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1799. 

tered,  and  a  copy  was  served  on  the  party  accused.  In 
most  cases  the  incumbent  appeared  in  person  before  the 
council,  and  made  his  defence.  The  council  then  either 
dismissed  the  complaint,  or  removed  the  officer,  as  they 
thought  rightj  but  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Lansing  and  Judge 
Peck,  no  such  proceedings  were  had. 

I  presume  mal-conduct  was  charged  against  both 
those  gentlemen,  and  I  cannot  believe  that  at  that  day  the 
council  would  have  removed  the  sheriff  of  New-York,  so 
near  the  end  of  his  term,  without  special  and  good  cause, 
though  that  cause  does  not,  as  it  ought,  according  to  for- 
mer practice,  appear  on  the  council  books.  In  the  case 
of  Judge  Peck,  too,  no  doubt,  complaints  of  misconduct 
were  made  against  him  by  such  heated  politicians  as  Judge 
Cooper  and  his  immediate  friends;  but  that  Jedediah  Peck 
was  guilty  of  official  mal-conduct,  I  do  not  believe  j  and  if 
his  removal  was  attempted  to  be  put  on  that  ground,  that 
circumstance  probably  added  to  the  unpopularity  of  the 
measure.  His  re-election  as  a  member  of  the  assembly, 
by  a  triumphant  majority,  in  less  than  sixty  days  after  his 
removal,  affords  evidence  of  the  judgment  his  neighbors 
formed  of  his  conduct.  In  justice  to  Gov.  Jay,  it  is  proper 
to  add,  that  according  to  the  practice  then  existing,  a  re- 
moval from  office  might  be  made,  against  the  wishes  of 
the  governor,  on  the  motion  of  any  member  of  the  council, 
although  an  appointment  could  not  be  effected,  according 
to  Gov.  Jay's  construction  of  the  constitution,  without  his 
consent,  or  rather  without  his  nomination. 

A  bill  for  the  gradual  abolition  of  slavery,  passed  the 
assembly  during  this  session,  but  was  lost  in  the  senate. 

Before  the  adjournment  of  the  legislature.  Judge  Peck 
introduced  into  the  assembly  a  bill  abolishing  imprison- 
ment for  all  debts  arising  on  contract,  express  or  implied, 
which,  when  called  up,  was  rejected  without  a  division. 
I   mention   this   circumstance   as   evidence  of  the   great 


1799.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  129 

change  which  the  public  mind  has  undergone  since  the 
close  of  the  eighteenth  century,  in  relation  to  this  import- 
ant question,  and  as  creditable  to  the  benevolent  feelings 
and  native  sagacity  of  Jedediah  Peck.  We  shall  pre- 
sently see  him,  if  not  the  projector,  at  least  the  perse- 
vering and  efficient  advocate  of  another  great  measure — a 
measure  on  the  success  of  which  depends  the  preservation 
of  the  freedom  and  civil  institutions  of  this  country;  I  mean 
the  Common  School  System.  The  act  for  "  supplying  the 
city  of  New-York  with  pure  and  wholesome  water,"  or  in 
other  words,  the  bill  chartering  the  Manhattan  Bank, 
passed  a  few  days  before  the  adjournment  of  the  legisla- 
ture. The  scheme  of  chartering  this  company  was  formed 
and  mainly  executed  by  Col.  Burr.  The  bill  was  so 
drawn  as  to  enable  Col.  Burr  and  his  republican  friends  to 
get  the  control  of  a  majority  of  the  stock,  and  of  course, 
of  the  funds  of  the  company.  It  is  an  admitted  fact,  that 
a  large  majority  of  the  legislature  at  the  time  they  granted 
this  charter,  did  not  know  that  it  contained  a  grant  of 
banking  powers.  I  shall  take  another  occasion  to  remark 
on  these  proceedings,  as  well  as  those  relating  to  the  in- 
corporation of  the  New-York  State  Bank  at  Albany,  in 
the  year  1802,  when  I  come  to  the  time  when  the  Bank 
of  America  was  chartered.  As  that  event  resulted  in  a  new 
organization  of  parties,  the  subject  of  procuring  bank 
charters  will  then  be  fully  considered. 

The  election  in  April,  1799,  terminated  more  unfavorably 
to  the  republicans  than  had  been  anticipated.  New-York, 
which  for  the  two  preceding  years  had  elected  republicans, 
this  year  elected  federalists  by  the  large  majority  of  about 
nine  hundred.  Col.  Burr  was  placed  at  the  head  of  the 
republican  ticket,  and  previous  to  the  election,  the  secret 
was  out,  that  tlie  charter  to  the  Manhattan  company  con- 
tained a  clause  that  vested  them  with  banking  powers. 

It  was  alleged,  (and  truly   alleged,)  that  a   very   large 

9 


130  POLITICAL  HISTORY-  J 1799. 

majority  of  the  legislature  had  been  cheated,  for  that 
while  they  believed  they  were  simply  providing  the  means 
of  supplying  the  city  with  pure  and  wholesome  water,  they 
had  created  a  bank  which  was  to  be  managed  as  a  great 
party  machine,  and  which  was  to  minister  to  the  personal 
and  ambitious  projects  of  Col.  Burr.  A  very  inflammatory 
pamphlet  was  written  and  generally  circulated  before  the 
election,  presenting  in  bold  relief  these  and  other  views 
to  the  New-York  public.  The  democratic  newspapers  of 
the  day,  charged  the  loss  of  the  election  in  New- York  to 
these  efforts,  and  it  is  very  probable  that  they  had  a  pro- 
digious and  perhaps  controlling  efi'ect  on  the  result  of  the 
election.  In  Columbia  county,  too,  where  the  republicans 
expected  success,  the  federalists  elected  their  ticket  j  but, 
in  the  eastern  and  western  districts  there  was  considerable 
republican  gain.  In  Otsego  coimty.  Judge  Peck  was  re- 
elected, notwithstanding  the  vigorous  opposition  made 
against  him  by  Judge  Cooper  and  other  active  and  influen 
tial  federalists. 

In  the  southern  district,  in  consequence  of  the  large 
majority  in  the  city  of  New-York,  Messrs.  Hatfield  and 
Coles,  the  two  federal  candidates,  were  elected.  In  the 
middle  district,  the  republicans  were  more  fortunate  and 
succeeded  in  electing  Isaac  Bloom  of  Dutchess,  John 
Hathorn  of  Orange,  and  John  Suffern  of  Rockland. 
Zina  Hitchcock,  Ebenezer  Russell,  and  Moses  Vail,  were 
re-elected  from  the  eastern,  and  Moss  Kent  and  Vincent 
Matthews  were  elected  from  the  western  district.  These 
gentlemen  were  all  federalists.  During  ihe  summer  which 
succeeded  the  election  of  April,  1799,  several  very  vexa- 
tious prosecutions  were  instituted  for  a  breach  of  the  se- 
dition law.  Among  others,  Mr.  Charles  Holt,  printer  of 
the  Bee  at  New  London,  was  prosecuted  and  imprisoned. 
A  Mr.  Baldwin  of  New- Jersey,  was  also  indicted,  tried, 
convicted,  and  fined,  under  color  of  the  sedition  law,  for 


1799.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  131 

the  following  offence: — ^Mr.  Adams,  on  his  return  from  the 
seat  of  government,  passed  through  Newark  ;  some  can- 
non were  discharged  in  compliment  to  him,  while  passing 
through  that  village  j  Mr.  Baldwin,  who  it  would  appear, 
was  rather  a  low  bred  man,  said  he  wished  the  wadding 
discharged  from  the  cannon  had  been  lodged  in  the  presi- 
dent's backsides.  For  this  he  was  fined  one  hundred  dol 
lars.  The  federalists  of  New-York,  having  triumphantly- 
succeeded  in  the  late  election,  and  all  branches  both  of 
the  state  and  national  government  being  with  them,  should 
have  endeavored  to  quiet  and  soothe  the  feelings  and  miti- 
gate the  jealousies  of  their  opponents.  Buonaparte's 
maxim  was,  that  the  proper  time  for  making  overtures  of 
peace  was  after  a  victory.  It  was  a  wise  and  sound  max- 
im, and  is  equally  applicable  to  political  parties.  Then 
was  the  time  for  the  federalists  of  New-York  to  have  acted 
with  magnanimity  and  kindness  towards  those  political 
enemies  over  whom  they  had  so  recently  obtained  a  victory. 
But  their  conduct  was  directly  the  reverse.  They  mani- 
fested a  vindictive  and  persecuting  spirit  towards  their 
opponents.  I  shall  mention  only  one  instance.  Gen. 
John  Armstrong,  though  he  was  not  then  known  as  the 
author,  had  written  with  his  usual  ability  and  in  his  usual 
unequalled  styie  of  bitterness  and  severity,  a  petition  to 
congress  for  the  repeal  of  the  alien  and  sedition  laws. 
Copies  of  this  petition  were  sent  into  the  various  counties 
in  the  state,  ostensibly  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  signa- 
tures, but  no  doubt,  really  with  the  view  of  keeping  the 
odious  features  of  these  laws  before  the  people  and  con- 
tinuing and  increasing  the  agitation  of  the  public  mind. 
Some  copies  of  these  petitions  were  sent  to  Judge  Peck  of 
Otsego  county,  and  he  offered  them  for  signature  to  his 
neighbors.  For  this  offence.  Judge  Cooper  wrote  to  Mr. 
Harrison,  then  United  States  district  attorney,  insisting 
that  a  prosecution,  under  color  of  the  sedition  law,  should 


132  POLITICAL   HISTOaY  [1799. 

be  instituted  against  Mr.  Peck.  Mr.  Harrison  was  impru- 
dent enough  to  listen  to  these  complaints,  and  a  grand  jury 
of  the  district  of  New-York  was  empannelled  who  were 
weak  enough  to  find  a  bill  of  indictment  for  this  alleged 
offence.  A  bench  warrant  was  issued  and  Judge  Peck 
was  taken  from  his  family  by  an  officer,  to  the  city  of 
New-York.  A  hundred  missionaries  in  the  cause  of  de- 
mocracy, stationed  between  New-York  and  Cooperstown, 
could  not  have  done  so  much  for  the  republican  cause  as 
this  journey  of  Judge  Peck,  as  a  prisoner,  from  Otsego  to 
the  capital  of  the  state.  It  was  nothing  less  than  the 
public  exhibition  of  a  suffering  martyr  for  the  freedom  of 
speech  and  the  press,  and  the  right  of  petitioning,  to  the 
view  of  the  citizens  of  the  various  places  through  which 
the  marshal  travelled  with  his  prisoner.  Strange  infatua- 
tion !  But  thus  it  is ;  parties  always  have  been  and 
always  will  be  hurried  into  measures  which  result  in  their 
own  overthrow,  by  the  indiscreet  zeal,  or  the  malignant 
spirit  of  personal  revenge,  of  their  own  friends. 

On  the  9th  day  of  December,  died  General  George 
Washington.  Independent  of  the  loss  which  the  country 
in  general  sustained  by  the  decease  of  this  great  and  good 
man,  his  death  was  to  the  federalists  as  a  party,  at  this 
particular  juncture,  an  irreparable  loss.  Gen.  Washington 
was  known  to  be  a  supporter  of  the  administration  of  Mr. 
Adams.  He  had  accepted  of  the  command  of  the  provi- 
sional army,  raised  by  a  recent  law  of  congress,  and  al- 
though that  law  was  peculiarly  offensive  to  the  republican 
party,  so  great  and  so  universal  was  the  confidence  in  Gen. 
Washington,  that  it  was  difficult  to  convince  the  people 
that  any  measure  sanctioned  by  him  could  be  dangerous, 
or  that  an  administration  which  received  his  approbation 
could  be  unworthy  of  their  support.  But,  upon  his  death, 
the  name  of  Gen.  Washington  could  no  longer  be  thrown 


1800.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  133 

into  the  scales  in  balancing  the  merits  of  any  future  mea- 
sure which  might  be  adopted  by  the  administration. 

The  legislature  met  at  Albany  on  the  28th  day  of  Janu- 
ary, 1800.  Derick  Ten  Broeck  was  re-elected  speaker 
without  opposition. 

The  governor,  in  the  introductory  part  of  his  speech, 
pronounced  a  short  but  elegant  eulogy  on  Gen.  Washing- 
ton. In  the  residue  of  his  remarks  he  avoided  touching 
on  any  party  questions,  and  confined  himself  to  the  recom- 
mendation of  several  very  salutary  and  judicious  amend- 
ments of  the  laws.  He  concluded  by  urging  further  pro- 
visions for  the  support  of  common  schools. 

On  the  5th  February, the  assembly  effected  Samuel  Haight 
from  the  southern,  Robert  Sands  from  the  middle,  James 
Gordon  from  the  eastern,  and  Thomas  R.  Gold  from  the 
western  district,  members  of  the  council  of  appointment 
for  the  year  ensuing. 

The  legislature,  in  the  early  part  of  this  session,  reduced 
the  salary  of  the  comptroller  from  three  thousand  dollars 
to  two  thousand  five  hundred,whereupon  Mr.Jones  declined 
a  re-appointment,(the  comptroller,  by  the  original  law,  was 
appointed  annually,)  and  on  the  12th  March,  John  V. 
Henry,  of  Albany,  since  well  known  as  an  eminent  law- 
yer, who  was  then  a  member  of  the  assembly,  was  ap- 
pointed to  that  office. 

On  the  same  day,  (12th  March,)  a  debate  arose  in  the 
assembly  on  a  bill  brought  in  by  Judge  Peck,  to  divide  the 
state  into  districts,  and  for  the  choice  of  presidential  elec- 
tors by  the  people.  This  was  opposed  by  the  federalists, 
principally  on  the  ground  that  it  was  unconstitutional. 
The  constitution  of  the  United  States  declares,  "  That  each 
state  shall  appoint,  in  such  manner  as  the  legislature 
thereof  shall  direct,  such  number  of  electors,"  &c.  It  was 
contended  that  the  direction  that  "each  state  shall  appoint," 
implied  that  the  state  should  act  as  a  body  corporate,  and 


134  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

therefore,  that  the  electors  coukl  not  be  appointed  by  the 
people.  The  debate,  on  the  part  of  the  federalists,  was 
principally  conducted  by  Mr.  John  V.  Henry.  The  spea- 
kers on  the  other  side,  were  Mr.  Peck,  Mr.  Comstock  of 
Saratoga,  and  Mr.  Thomas  of  Washington.  The  bill  was 
finally  rejected,  on  the  motion  of  Mr.  Shurtleff  of  Sche- 
nectady, by  a  vote  of  fifty-five  to  forty-seven. 

Mr.  Watson  resigned  his  seat  in  the  senate  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  and  Governeur  Morris  was  chosen  in  his 
place,  on  the  3d  day  of  April.  Peter  Gansevoort  of 
Albany,  was  the  opposing  candidate.  In  the  senate,  Mr. 
Morris  received  twenty-five  votes,  and  Mr.  Gansevoort 
eleven.  In  the  assembly  the  vote  stood  fifty-four  to  forty- 
eight. 

The  legislature  adjourned  on  the  8th  April,  to  the  first 
Tuesday  of  November. 

The  result  of  the  election  in  April,  1800,  afforded  a  com- 
plete triumph  to  the  democratic  party  in  the  state,  and  we 
may  add,  also,  in  the  nation.  This  extraordinory  success 
disappointed  and  surprised  both  federalists  and  republicans. 
The  city  of  New-York,  although  the  year  before  it  had 
given  a  federal  majority  of  nine  hundred,  this  year  elected 
republican  members.  The  republicans  succeeded  in  three 
out  of  the  four  senatorial  districts,  which  reduced  the  fede- 
ral majority  in  the  senate  to  seven,  while  in  the  assembly 
that  party  obtained  a  majority  of  twenty-eight.  By  this 
means  the  election  of  electors  in  favor  of  Mr.  Jefierson 
was  rendered  certain,  and  his  election  to  the  presidency 
was  equally  certain.  The  eastern  district  was  the  only 
district  which  returned  federal  senators.  From  that  dis- 
trict, James  Gordon  and  Stephen  Fink  were  chosen;  from 
the  southern,  Wm.  Dunning,  Jonathan  Purdy  and  Benja. 
Hunting;  from  the  middle,  David  Van  Ness,  Solomon 
Sutherland,  John  C,  Hogeboom,  Jacobus  S.  Bruyn  and 
James  W.  Wilkin   and  from  the  western,  Robert  Rose- 


1800.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  135 

boom  and  Jedediah  Sanger,  were  elected.  Mr.  Sanger 
afterwards  acted  with  the  federalists.*  Out  of  the  ten 
congressional  districts,  six  republicans  were  chosen. 

The  democratic  success  in  the  western  district,  which 
was  entirely  unexpected,  was,  I  have  no  doubt,  produced 
by  the  violent  proceedings  caused  by  the  over  zealous 
federalists,  particularly  by  the  oppressive  and  tyrannical 
manner  in  which  the  sedition  law  was  executed. 

In  the  city  of  New-York  it  is  probable  that  in  1799 
many  republicans  voted  the  federal  ticket  in  consequence 
of  their  dissatisfaction  with  the  manner  in  which  the  law 
granting  banking  powers  to  the  Manhattan  company  had 
been  smuggled  through  the  legislature,  and  for  the  rea- 
son that  Col.  Burr,  who  was  confessedly  the  contriver  and 
the  agent  who  effected  that  extraordinary  measure,  was 
then  a  candidate.  But  another  very  efficient  cause  of 
the  democratic  success  in  1800  in  that  city  was,  the  ex- 
ceedingly judicious  selection  of  candidates.  Col.  Burr 
was  not  himself  a  city  candidate.  This  circumstance  pre- 
vented the  Manhattan  question  from  prejudicing  the  elec- 
tion. Besides  the  bank  was  then  in  operation,  and  in- 
stead of  being  an  object  to  be  dreaded  and  represented  as 
odious,  it  then  had  the  power  of  conferring  favors,  and 
was  an  object  to  be  courted  by  all  those  whose  situation  or 
business  required  pecuniary  aid.  The  most  consummate 
prudence  and  skill  were  exercised  in  the  selection  of 
candidates.  The  republican  ticket  contained  thirteen 
men,  whose  wealth,  and  talents  and  weight  of  charac- 
ter were  probably  greater  than  any  other  equal  number 
of  republicans  then  to  be  found  in  the  city,  or  perhaps 
any  other  equal  number  of  citizens.  But  this  was  not 
all.  At  that  time  some  degree  of  rivalry  existed  be- 
tween the  Livingstons,  and  Clintons,  and  great  jealousy 
and  suspicion  were  entertained  between  both  the  Living- 
stons and  Clintons  and  Col.  Burr.  Each  had  their  warm 
*  He  was  probably  nomiaated  by  the  Federalists. 


136  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

personal  friends,  and  those  friends  partook  more  or  less  of 
the  feelings  and  prejudices  of  their  leaders.  A  set  of 
candidates  therefore  who  were  apparently  particularly 
friendly  to  either  of  these  leaders  would  have  been  coldly 
supported  by  the  others.  With  a  view  to  render  these 
jealousies  and  collisions  innoxious,  and  to  bring  the  whole 
democratic  party  heartily  into  action,  Gov.  Clinton  was 
placed  at  the  head  of  the  ticket,  Brockholst  Livingston, 
the  most  talented  member  of  the  Livingston  family,  was 
also  made  a  candidate,  and  to  prevent  any  dissatisfaction 
on  the  part  of  the  friends  of  Col.  Burr,  Mr.  John  Swart- 
wout,  known  to  be  his  confidential  friend  was  nominated 
and  Mr.  Burr  himself  was  nominated  and  elected  from  the 
county  of  Orange.  In  order  to  call  out  the  revolutionary 
feelings  and  sympathies  of  the  electors,  Gen.  Horatio 
Gates  was  also  placed  on  the  ticket.  John  Broome,  af- 
terwards lieutenant  governor,  Henry  Rutgers,  Samuel 
Osgood,  and  sundry  other  eminent  citizens  of  great  weight 
of  character  and  personal  popularity,  were  likewise  put  in 
nomination.  To  the  address  and  skill,  and  indefatigable 
perseverance  of  Col.  Burr,  this  selection  of  candidates  is 
in  a  great  measure  owing.  Mr.  Cheetham,  in  his  view 
of  the  political  conduct  of  Col.  Burr,  and  in  his  reply  to 
Aristides,  is,  it  appears  to  me,  uncandid  in  denying  to  Mr. 
B.  the  credit  of  being  the  principal  agent  in  effecting  this 
arrangement.  The  large  federal  majority  which  had  been 
obtained  by  the  federalists  the  preceding  year,  induced 
many  leading  republicans  to  believe  and  declare  to  their 
friends  that  all  efforts  would  be  vain;  Col.  Burr,  on  the 
other  hand,  persisted  in  affirming  that  success  was  certain 
if  arrangements  could  be  made  which  would  bring  to  the 
polls,  the  whole  force  of  the  democratic  partyj  and  it  was 
his  plastic  hand  which  formed  this  excellent  ticket.  It 
was,  in  a  great  measure,  his  ardent  persuasions  which  in- 
duced some  of  the  candidates  to  permit  their  names  to  be 


1800.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  137 

used.  The  arrangement  was  not  finally  consummated 
until  a  few  evenings  before  the  election,  when  it  was  ef- 
fected at  an  interview  between  Gov.  Clinton  and  Col. 
Burr  and  four  or  five  other  friends,  at  the  house  of  Mr. 
Gelston,  in  the  city  of  New-York. 

Smith  Thompson  made  his  first  appearance  in  public  life 
this  year,  as  a  member  of  the  assembly  from  the  county 
of  Dutchess. 

Before  I  enter  upon  the  history  of  the  November  ses- 
sion of  the  legislature,  I  shall  endeavor  to  give  some  ac- 
count of  the  conduct  and  movements  of  two  distinguished 
New-York  politicians,  in  respect  to  the  coming  presiden- 
tial election.  The  gentlemen  to  whom  I  allude  are  Aaron 
Burr  and  Alexander  Hamilton.  In  tracing  their  course,  I 
shall  necessarily  be  carried  beyond  the  first  meeting  of  the 
legislature,  and  into  the  winter  of  the  year  180 Ij  but  I 
think  this  method  will  enable  the  reader  to  get  a  more 
distinct  view  of  the  political  operations  of  that  year,  than 
by  confining  myself  to  a  strict  chronological  order  of 
events. 

Congress  was  in  session  when  the  result  of  the  New- 
York  election  was  made  public.  As  soon  as  this  event 
was  known,  and  it  was  consequently  ascertained  that  a 
republican  president  and  vice-president  could  be  elected, 
it  became  necessary  to  settle  on  a  candidate  for  the  vice- 
presidency,  all  being  agreed  that  Mr.  Jefferson  should  be 
the  presidential  candidate.  In  the  month  of  May,  an 
informal  caucus  was  held  by  the  republican  members  of 
congress  at  Philadelphia,  to  deliberate  on  that  question. 
At  this  conference  it  was  agreed  that  the  vice-president 
should  be  taken  from  New-York,  and  Chancellor  Living- 
ston, Gov.  Clinton,  and  Mr.  Burr  were  mentioned.  The 
members  who  composed  this  conference  not  knowing  the 
wishes  of  the  majority  of  their  democratic  friends  in  New- 
York,  requested  Mr.  Gallatin  to  communicate  with  them 


138  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

and  ascertain  their  views.  Mr.  Gallatin,  in  pursuance  of 
this  request,  wrote  to  Commodore  Nickolson  of  New-York, 
and  requested  him  to  converse  frankly  and  freely  with  the 
gentlemen  who  had  been  named  as  candidates,  and  to 
consult  other  friends  and  inform  him,  (Mr.  G.,)  of  the 
result  of  his  enquiries. 

Com.  Nickolson  soon  found  that  the  deafness  of  Chan- 
cellor Livingston  presented  an  insuperable  barrier  to  his 
nomination.  He  then  called  on  Gov.  Clinton,  who,  at 
first,  strenuously  objected  to  the  nomination,  alleging  as 
a  reason  his  advanced  age,  impaired  health,  and  the  situa- 
tion of  his  family.  Com.  Nickolson  represented  that  their 
political  friends  might  think  that  the  success  of  the  demo- 
cratic party  would  be  endangered  by  his  declension,  upon 
which,  Mr.  Clinton  said,  that  if  his  name  should  be  deemed 
absolutely  necessary  to  ensure  success  to  the  republicans, 
he  would  consent  to  the  nomination,  on  the  express  condi- 
tion that  he  should  be  at  liberty  to  resign,  if  he  found  his 
health  and  circumstances  rendered  retirement  from  public 
employment  necessary.  The  friends  of  Gov.  Clinton 
allege,  that  upon  this,  Mr.  Nickolson  concluded  to  recom- 
mend to  the  Philadelphia  caucus,  the  selection  of  Gov. 
Clinton,  and  actually  wrote  a  letter  to  that  effect;  but  that 
he  went  from  Gov.  Clinton's  to  Col.  Burr's,  and  showed 
him  the  letter  he  had  written;  that  Mr.  B.  w^as  dissatisfied 
and  after  some  consultation  with  him  and  his  friends,  Mr. 
Nickolson  erased  the  name  of  Mr.  Clinton  and  inserted 
that  of  Col.  Burr.  {Cheetharn's  Reply  to  Aristides,  p.  52 
to  57.)  What  the  true  version  of  this  transaction  was,  it 
is  impossible,  at  this  day,  to  ascertain  with  certainty.  To 
me,  it  seems  probable,  from  the  spirit  of  rivalry  existing  be- 
tween Gov.  Clinton  and  Col.  Burr,  from  the  tenor  of  Mr. 
C's.  communication  to  the  commodore,  and  from  his 
subsequent  conduct  in  suffering  himself  to  be  a  candidate 
for  the  office  of  governor  and  afterwards  that  of  vice-pre- 


1800.]  OF  NEW-yoRK.  139 

sidentj  he  really  desired  to  be  a  candidate,  in  preference 
to  Col.  Burr.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  probable  as  Mr. 
B.  had,  while  in  the  United  States  senate,  formed  an 
acquaintance  and  friendship  with  many  of  the  southern 
politicians,  as  he  had,  at  the  election  in  1797,  received 
thirty  of  the  southern  votes  for  the  office  of  vice-president, 
and  as  his  friends  and  agents  were  very  active  in  his  favor, 
that  a  majority  of  the  members'  of  congress  were  really 
desirous  of  his  nomination,  and  that  Commodore  Nickolson 
was  apprised  of  this  fact.  In  this  way  I  account  for  his 
conduct  in  so  readily  giving  up  Gov.  Clinton,  and  recom- 
mending Col.  Burr. 

On  the  arrival  of  the  commodore's  letter  at  Philadelphia, 
Col.  Burr  was  nominated  for  vice-president  at  a  congres- 
sional caucus.  If  Mr.  Clinton  was  dissatisfied  with  this 
nomination,  or  the  manner  in  which  it  was  effected,  he  had 
too  much  discretion  to  manifest  his  disapprobation.  On 
the  contrary,  as  a  member  of  the  legislature  and  on  all 
occasions,  he  supported  with  good  faith  the  election  of  Mr. 
Jefferson  and  Mr.  Burr. 

Upon  canvassing  the  presidential  votes,  it  was  found 
that  Mr.  Jefferson  and  Mr.  Burr  had  each  of  them  received 
seventy-three  votes.  The  whole  number  of  votes  were 
one  hundred  and  thirty-eight,  leaving  for  Mr.  Adams  and 
Mr.  Pinckney  sixty-five  votes  each.*  This  result  produced 
a  convulsion,  which  imminently  threatened  a  dissolution  of 
the  government.  The  number  of  votes  given  to  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson and  Mr.  Burr  being  equal,  there  was  of  course,  no 
election  by  the  electors,  and  the  election  of  president  de- 
volved on  the  states  as  represented  in  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives of  the  United  States.  There  were  then  sixteen 
states.  Eight  of  them  were  republican,  six  were  federal, 
and  two  were  equally  divided.  It  was  necessary  that  a 
majority  of  the  states  should  cast  their  votes  for  one 
person,  in  order  to  effect  an  election,     lu  this  situation  of 

*  This  is  an  error— Mr.  P.  received  in  one  of  the  eastern  states  two  votes  less 
than  Adams. 


140  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

affairs,  Mr.  Burr  was  charged  with  an  attempt,  by  intrigue 
and  management,  to  cause  himself  to  be  elected  president, 
in  preference  to  Mr.  Jefferson.  It  was  this  charge, 
"  which  was  the  weight  that  pulled  him  down  "  from  the 
pinnacle  of  power  to  which  he  seemed  rising,  and  which, 
as  a  politician,  prostrated  him  forever. 

It  is  not  my  intention  to  examine  or  recapitulate  in  detail 
the  facts  urged  in  support  of  this  charge,  ortheargu-' 
ments  and  facts  presented  by  the  friends  of  Col.  Burr  in 
his  defence.  There  are,  how^ever,  two  circumstances 
about  which  there  can  be  no  doubt,  which  notwithstanding 
the  letter  of  Col.  Burr  to  Gen.  Smith  of  Maryland,  written 
before  the  result  of  the  canvass  was  known,*  produce  in 
my  mind  a  strong  conviction  that  he  did  seek  the  presi- 
dency, in  opposition  to  Mr.  Jefferson. 

In  the  state  of  Pennsylvania  a  majority  of  the  assembly 
was  democratic,  but  the  senate  was  federal.  It  was  for 
some  time  doubtful  what  would  be  the  political  character 
of  the  electors  of  that  state,  and  indeed,  whether  any  elec- 
tors at  all  would  be  chosen;  for  the  senate  afforded  some 
indications  that  they  would  not  meet  the  assembly  for  the 
purpose  of  going  into  a  joint  ballot.  The  electors,  it  will 
be  recollected,  were  then  chosen  in  that  state  by  the  legis- 
lature. Again,  it  w^as  uncertain  whether  the  state  of 
South  Carolina  would  elect  federal  or  republican  electors, 
and  the  electors  in  that  state  were  not  to  be  chosen  until 
the  second  day  of  December,  only  two  days  before  the 
votes  for  president  and  vice-president  were  to  be  given. 

It  was  ascertained  that  if  Pennsylvania  elected  a  full 
college  of  republican  electors,  a  republican  president 
would  be  chosen,  whether  South  Carolina  voted  for  him 
or  not.  The  electors  from  New- Jersey  had  been  appointed, 
and   they  were   federalists.     Those  who  held  that  Col. 

la  this  letter  Mr.  Burr  affects  to  decline  a  competition  with  Mr.  Jefferson. 


1800.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  141 

Burr  had  intrigued  for  the  presidency,  alleged  that  he 
had  agreed  with  the  federal  electors  of  New- Jersey,  that 
in  case  Pennsylvania  should  elect  republican  electors,  and 
thus  insure  the  defeat  of  Mr.  Adams,  they  should  cast 
their  vote  for  Mr.  Burr,  leaving  off  Mr.  Jefferson.  Mr. 
Cheetham,  in  his  view  of  the  political  conduct  of  Aaron 
Burr,  published  in  1802,  (p.  44,)  charges,  that  after  the 
election,  Jonathan  Dayton,  who  was  speaker  of  the 
house  of  representatives,  and  a  distinguished  federal  leader 
in  New-Jersey,  publicly  declared  that  such  was  the  ar- 
rangement and  agreement.  The  celebrated  pamphlet  of 
Aristides,  written  by  Judge  Wm.  P.  Van  Ness,  in  answer 
to  Cheetham's  '*  view,^  does  not  contradict  this  statement. 
The  subsequent  intimacy  between  Mr.  Dayton  and  Mr. 
Burr,  which  resulted  in  the  ruin  of  the  former,  goes  still 
further  to  confirm  this  statement.  The  arrangement,  if 
one  was  made,  was  not  carried  into  effect,  for  the  two 
houses  of  the  Pennsylvania  legislature  finally  compromised 
their  differences,  and  the  result  was  that  the  republicans 
had  but  one  majority  in  the  electoral  college  of  that  state. 

Was  this  agreement  of  the  New-Jersey  federalists  to 
vote  for  Col.  Burr  unknown  to  him  1  I  cannot  believe 
that  it  was. 

The  other  circumstance  to  which  I  shall  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  reader,  is,  that  after  the  electoral  vote  was 
known,  and  before  the  action  of  the  house  of  representa- 
tives, in  the  winter  of  1801,  Col.  Burr  went  to  Albany  to 
attend  the  legislature  as  a  member,  and  took  with  him 
William  P.  Van  Ness,  one  of  the  most  shrewd  and 
sagacious  men  which  this  state  ever  produced.  He  was 
Mr.  B's  most  confidential  friend.  Mr.  V.  N.,  before  the 
election  in  the  house  of  representatives,  wrote  to  Edward 
Livingston,  a  member  of  that  house,  advising  him  that  it 
"  was  the  sense  of  the  republican  party  of  this  state,  that 
after  some  trials  in  the  house  Mr.  Jefferson  should  be  given 


142  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1800. 

up  for  Mr.  Burr."  This,  by  the  bye,  was  notoriously 
untrue.  Other  letters  were  written  to  the  same  effect. 
This  charge  is  made  in  Cheetham's  "  tJzew,"  &c.,  which 
was  answered  by  Mr.  Van  Ness,  as  I  have  before  stated, 
in  the  pamphlet  to  which  he  affixed  the  signature  of  Ari- 
stides.  In  that  pamphlet  he  does  not  deny  that  he  wrote 
the  letter,  and  such  a  letter^to  Mr.  Livingston.  Can  any 
man  doubt  that  that  letter  was  written  with  the  know- 
ledge and  approbation  of  Col.  Burr  *?  Assurances  were 
given  by  the  friends  of  Mr.  B.,  that  after  several  ballot- 
iftgs  the  states  of  New-York,  Tennessee,  and  perhaps 
New-Jersey,  would  go  for  Col.  Burr.  When  the  house 
of  representatives  commenced  the  business  of  president 
making  on  the  11th  of  February,  a  dreadful  scene  was 
opened.  Thirty-six  ballotings  were  had.  The  balloting 
continued  four  days  and  four  nights,  and  finally  terminated 
in  the  choice  of  Mr.  Jefferson.  The  friends  of  Mr.  Burr 
charged  Mr.  Jefferson  with  purchasing,  by  a  promise  of 
office,  some  of  those  members  of  congress  who,  it  was 
supposed,  had  intended  to  vote  for  Mr.  B.,  and  in  fulfil- 
ment of  these  engagements,  it  is  alleged  that  Mr.  Linn 
was  appointed  supervisor  of  the  revenue  of  New-Jersey, 
Mr.  Livingston  district  attorney  of  New- York,  Gen.  Bailey 
post-master  at  the  city  of  New- York,  and  Mr.  Clairborne 
of  Tennessee,  governor  of  the  territory  of  Missisippi. 

The  conduct  of  Col.  Burr  was  as  impolitic  as  it  was 
faithless  to  his  party.  He  remained  at  Albany  during  the 
whole  winter.  He  shrouded  himself  in  mystery.  His 
scheme  undoubtedly  was,  to  suffer  the  federalists  and  a 
few  republicans  to  elect  him,  without  appearing  himself 
to  take  part  in  the  election  and  without  any  special  com- 
mitments. If  Mr.  Jefferson  should  be  chosen,  he  supposed 
by  this  mysterious  course  of  action,  or  rather  no  apparent 
action,  he  could  still  retain  his  standing  with  the  republi- 
can party.     If,  on  the  contrary,  he  should  be  the  success- 


1800.]  OF    KEW-YORK.  143 

fiil  candidate,  he  imagined  that  the  power  and  patronage 
conferred  by  the  office  would  enable  him  to  sustain  himself 
and  to  form  a  party  out  of  the  wreck  of  the  two  parties, 
*  which  would  constitute  a  majority  in  the  nation.  This 
course  of  conduct  was  weak  as  well  as  wicked.  There 
are  times  when  it  may  be  discreet  for  a  politician  to  tempo- 
rize; but  there  are  also  times  when  a  temporizing  policy 
is  the  most  injudicious  policy  which  can  be  pursued. 
The  present  was,  with  Col.  Burr,  a  time  for  action,  and 
not  for  halting  and  hesitating.  Although,  as  an  honorable 
member  of  the  republican  party,  he  could  not  with  pro- 
priety enter  the  list  against  Mr.  Jefferson,  there  was  no 
treason  in  doing  so;  and  had  he  done  so  openly,  a 
large  and  respectable  portion  of  community  would  have 
sustained  him.  He  would,  in  the  then  excited  state  of 
party  feeling,  at  any  rate  by  taking  this  course,  probably 
have  succeeded;  and  success  in  politics,  as  in  war,  too 
generally  in  public  estimation,  sanctifies  the  means  by 
which  it  is  procured.  That  Col.  Burr,  if  he  had  pursued 
this  line  of  conduct,  would  have  received  the  support  of 
the  federalits  and  would  ultimately  have  been  elected,  is 
rendered  probable  by  a  letter  written  by  Judge  Cooper, 
then  a  member  of  the  house  of  representatives,  from  this 
state,  to  Thomas  Morris,  on  the  last  day  of  balloting,  in 
which  he  says,  "  Had  Burr  done  any  thing  for  himself,  he 
would  long  ere  this  have  been  president,"  (2  Davis j  116.) 
Judge  Cooper  was  an  uneducated  man,  but  very  few  knew 
men  better  than  he,  Mr.  Burr,  therefore,  in  my  judgment, 
ought  either  frankly  and  openly  to  have  declared  himself 
a  candidate  in  opposition  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  manifested 
a  readiness  to  make  a  common  cause  with  his  friends;  or 
he  should  have  repaired  in  person  to  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment and  requested  his  friends  to  support  Mr.  Jefferson. 
He  should  have  publicly  and  unequivocally  declared  he 
would   not   accept   of  an  election  made   in  the  way  his 


/ 


144  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

election,  if  effected  at  all,  must  have  been  made,  and  the 
latter  was,  beyond  question,  the  path  of  duty  as  well  as 
that  of  honor.  While  he  was  himself  vaguely  intimating 
that  he  did  not  wish  to  enter  into  competition  with  Mr. 
Jefferson,  his  friends  were  urging  republican  members  of 
congress  to  abandon  Mr.  Jefferson  and  support  Burr.  He 
balanced — he  hesitated — he  equivocated.  In  reviewing 
his  conduct  on  this  occasion,  one  cannot  help  being  re- 
minded of  the  ludicrous  description  given  by  Casca  of 
Ceesar's  refusal  to  accept  a  crown  : — "  I  saw  Mark  An- 
thony offer  him  a  crown,  *  *  *  And  as  I  told  you,  he  put 
it  by  once,  but  for  all  that,  to  my  thinking,  he  would  fain 
have  had  it.  Then  he  offered  it  to  him  again,  then  he  put 
it  by  again;  but  to  my  thinking  he  was  very  loath  to  lay 
his  fingers  off  it." 

The  high  character  of  Gen.  Hamilton,  his  acknowledged 
transcendency  of  talents  and  commanding  influence  with 
the  federalists  in  this  state  and  nation,  render  his  conduct 
in  relation  to  the  presidential  election  in  1800,  worthy  of 
particular  attention. 

Immediately  after  the  result  of  the  state  election  was 
knowm,  and  on  the  seventh  day  of  May,  Gen.  Hamilton, 
with  the  approbation,  as  is  said,  of  a  caucus  of  his  political 
friends  in  New-York,  addressed  a  letter  to  Gov.  Jay, 
requesting  and  urging  him  forthwith  to  call  the  then  exist- 
ing legislature  together,  with  a  view  that  before  the  legis- 
lative year  expired,  (and  it  will  be  remembered  that  under 
the  old  constitution  it  expired  on  the  first  of  July,)  they 
should  pass  an  act  dividing  the  state  into  districts  for  the 
choice  of  presidential  electors  by  the  people.  It  was 
supposed,  and  the  event  proved  the  supposition  well 
founded,  that  Mr.  Jefferson  could  not  get,  including  the 
twelve  New-York  votes,  more  than  73  votes,  and  seventy 
votes  were  necessary  to  a  choice.  If,  therefore,  four  fed- 
eral votes  could  be  obtained  in  this  state,  (and  that  there 


1800.1  OF   NEW-YORK.  145 

could,  if  the  state  was  divided  into  districts,  did  not  admit 
of  any  doubt,)  the  election  of  Jefferson  would  be  defeated. 
Mr.  Hamilton,  in  his  letter,  uses  this  extraordinary  lan- 
guage, "  You,  sir,  know  in  a  great  degree  the  anti-federal 
party,  but  I  fear  you  do  not  know  them  as  well  as  I  do. 
'Tis  a  composition  indeed  of  very  incongruous  materials, 
but  all  tending  to  mischief ;  some  of  them  to  the  over- 
throw of  the  government  by  stripping  it  of  its  due  ener- 
gies," [Jefiersonians;]  "  others  of  them,"  [Burr,]  a  revo- 
lution after  the  manner  of  Buonaparte.  "  I  speak  from 
indubitable  facts,  not  from  conjecture  and  inferences." 
How  Gen.  Hamilton  could  feel  authorized  to  make  these 
bold,  and  as  all  will  now  admit,  unwarrantable  assertions, 
to  such  a  man  as  Gov.  Jay,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive.  He 
concluded  by  urging  the  governor  to  make  the  call  as  the 
only  remaining  means  of  saving  the  nation. 

At  the  time  Mr.  Hamilton  made  this  recommendation 
to  Gov.  Jay,  he  must  have  known  that  a  proposition  in- 
volving this  very  scheme,  had  been  made  in  the  assembly 
by  Mr.  Swartwout  and  Judge  Peck  a  few  months  before, 
and  in  that  body  had  been  rejected  by  the  united  votes  ©/" 
the  federalists.  He  must  have  known  that  that  able  law- 
yer, and  honest  and  honorable  man,  John  V.  Henry, 
had  opposed  it  mainly  on  the  ground  that  it  was  unconsti- 
tutional. Had  the  constitution  changed,  or  was  Mr.  Henry 
and  the  whole  federal  party  in  the  assembly  to  change  at 
the  bidding  of  Gen.  Hamilton  1  John  Jay,  the  pure,  the 
honest,  the  patriotic  John  Jay,  who  at  that  moment  was 
as  zealous  a  federalist  as  the  United  States  contained,  to 
his  immortal  honor,  refused  to  yield  to  this  pressing  soli- 
citation. On  the  back  of  that  letter  will  now  be  found 
the  following  endorsement.  "  Proposing  a  measure  for 
•party  purposes  J  which  I  think  it  would  not  become  me  to 
adopts  In  the  history  of  man,  amidst  his  follies,  his 
rices,  and  his  crimes,  there  are  now  and  then  green  spots 

10 


146  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

on  which  the  mind  delights  to  dwell,  and  this  is  one  of 
them.  This  demonstration  of  virtue  and  high  integrity, 
ought  to  embalm  the  memory  of  John  Jay  in  the  heart  of 
every  honest  man  and  true  patriot.  It  brings  to  one's 
mind  the  so  much  admired  decision  of  the  people  of 
Athens,  on  the  proposition  made  to  them  byTbemistocles 
through  Aristides.  The  letter  of  Gen.  Hamilton  may  be 
seen  in  1  Jay,  412 — The  general's  name  is  not  printed  at 
the  foot  of  it,  but  it  is,  I  believe,  universally  admitted  that 
he  wrote  and  subscribed  it. 

There  is  something  singular,  and  to  my  mind  mysteri- 
ous, in  the  character  of  Gen.  Hamilton.  That  he  was  a 
very  great  man — perhaps  the  greatest  man  on  the  score 
of  talents,  who  flourished  during  the  revolution,  I  believe. 
The  testimony  of  good  judges  now  living,  who  knew  him 
well,  and  the  writings  which  he  has  left  behind  him,  par- 
ticularly the  Federalist,  together  with  his  official  reports 
as  secretary  of  the  treasury,  sustain  me  in  this  opinion; 
and  that  he  honestly  believed  the  measures  which  he  ad- 
vocated were  the  measures  best  calculated  to  advance  the 
prosperity  of  the  country;  and  also,  that  he  honestly, 
frankly,  and  fearlessly  declared  his  opinions  on  all  proper 
occasions,  both  publicly,  and  privately,  I  have  no  manner 
of  doubt.  But  there  were  many  things  in  his  conduct 
towards  men^  which  we  shall  find  it  difficult  to  approve; 
and  in  some  of  his  political  movements  his  actions  seem 
to  have  been  inconsistent  with  that  good  faith  which  a 
member,  and  especially  a  leader  of  a  political  party  owes 
to  the  friends  with  whom  he  is  associated.  Upon  a  close 
analysis  of  his  conduct,  his  errors,  I  think,  will  be  found 
to  have  originated  from  having  formed  too  low  an  estimate 
of  the  intelligence  and  patriotism  of  the  mass  of  commu- 
nity, and  to  an  immoderate  and  most  intense  personal 
ambition. 

He  was  always  opposed  to  Gov.  Clinton,  but  his  oppo- 


1800.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  147 

sition  to  him  was  founded  oh  a  radical  difference  in 
opinionj  respecting  what  ought  to  be  the  principles  and 
the  policy  of  the  government.  That  opposition  was  open 
and  frank,  and  always  conducted  honorably.  Of  Col. 
Burr,  he  was  the  professional  rival,  (though  vastly  his 
superior,)  and  he  was  unwaveringly  politically  opposed  to 
him;  although  Col,  Burr  at  times  supported  the  party  to 
which  Gen.  Hamilton  was  attached,  the  hostility  of  the 
latter  to  the  former,  seems  never  for  one  moment  to  have 
undergone  the  least  mitigation.  There  were  good  reasons 
why  he  should  have  been  politically  opposed  to  Gov. 
Clintonj  and  there  were  also,  equally  good  reasons  why 
he  should  have  been  opposed  to  Burr,  probably  as  well 
personally  as  politicallyj — but  he  was  also  unfriendly,  and 
for  a  long  period  was  opposed  to  Mr.  John  Adams.  Why 
should  he  have  been  hostile  to  Mr.  Adams?  Both  he 
and  Mr.  Adams  were  pursuing  the  same  object,  the 
support  of  the  federal  cause  in  the  Union.  Adams  could 
not,  had  he  been  disposed  to  do  so,  cross  the  track  or 
thwart  the  views  of  Gen.  Hamilton  in  the  state  of  New- 
York.  Why  then,  should  the  latter  have  been  the  early, 
the  constant,  and  finally,  the  vindictive  opponent  of  the 
former  1  Did  Hamilton  believe  that  the  northern  section 
of  the  union  could  not  sustain  two  great  men  1 

On  the  22d  October,  1800,  a  few  days  before  the  presi- 
dential electors  were  to  be  chosen  in  every  state  in  the 
nation.  Gen.  Hamilton  published  a  pamphlet,  in  the  form 
of  a  letter,  "  on  the  public  conduct  and  character  of  John 
Adams."  It  contained  a  virulent  attack  upon  him,  per- 
sonally as  well  as  politically;  it  is  said,  and  indeed  it  is 
intimated  by  Gen.  Hamilton,  that  he  did  not  intend  this 
for  the  public  eye;  that  he  caused  it  to  be  printed  for  the 
purpose  of  more  conveniently  sending  it  to  his  confidential 
friends.  This  circumstance,  if  the  attack  was  unjustifia- 
ble, rendered  the  act  more  culpable.     To  attempt  to  rob 


148  POLITICAL    HISTORY.  [1800. 

a  man  of  the  esteem  and  confidence  of  his  friends  by 
secret  communications,  against  which  he  cannot  defend 
himself,  because  he  does  not  know  of  their  existence,  is 
more  unjust,  more  cruel  than  to  attack  him  openly.  This 
I  can  not  believe  that  Mr.  Hamilton  intended,  as  it  is  in- 
consistent with  the  general  tenor  of  his  conduct.  It  is 
however,  certain,  that  parts  of  the  letter  were  made  public, 
contrary  to  the  wishes  of  Mr.  H.,  or  sooner  than  he 
desired.  If  the  following  anecdote  be  founded  upon  fact, 
it  accounts  for  the  premature  publication  of  this  document. 
It  is  said  that  Hamilton  ordered  it  to  be  privately  printed 
and  the  copies  all  sent  to  him;  that  the  printer  after  excu- 
ting  the  work  early  in  the  morning,  sent  the  pamphlets  by 
a  boy  to  Gen.  Hamilton;  that  Burr,  who  was  an  early 
riser,  happening  that  morning  to  be  walking  in  the  streets 
near  the  house  of  Hamilton,  met  the  boy  with  a  cov- 
ered basket  on  his  arm,  coming  from  the  printing  office, 
and  travelling  in  the  direction  of  the  residence  of  Hamil- 
ton, and  casually  asked  the  lad  what  he  had  in  his  basket  ? 
He  said  "pamphlets  for  Gen.  Hamilton;"  not  knowing 
that  they  were  of  the  least  importance.  Burr  then  per- 
suaded the  boy  to  let  him  have  one  of  them,  and  forthwith 
caused  extracts  from  it  to  be  published  and  widely  circu- 
lated. I  can  not  vouch  for  the  truth  of  this  story;  I  have 
it,  however,  from  a  gentleman  of  high  standing,  who  him- 
self believed  it.  Mr.  Davis,  (2  life  of  Burr,  65,)  gives  a 
different  account  of  the  means  by  which  the  letter  of  Gen. 
H.  was  first  made  public. 

Gen.  Hamilton  commences  this  letter  by  affirming  that 
Mr.  Adams  had  great  and  intrinsic  defects  in  his  character, 
which  rendered  him  unfit  for  the  office  of  chief  magistrate, 
and  that  his  talents  were  not  adapted  to  the  administration 
of  the  government.  Mr.  H.  says  in  page  seven  of  his 
letter,  that  Mr.  Adams  "  is  a  man  of  an  imagination 
sublimated  and  eccentric,  propitious  neither  to  the  regular 


* 


1800.]  OF   NEW-YOKK.  149 

display  of  a  sound  judgment,  nor  to  steady  perseverance 
in  a  systematic  plan  of  conductj  and  to  this  defect  is 
added  the  unfortunate  foible  of  a  vanity  without  bounds, 
and  a  jealousy  capable  of  discoloring  every  object."  For 
proof  of  this  he  relates  several  anecdotes  of  Mr.  Adams, 
some  of  them  referring  to  occurrences  in  France,  To 
show  the  propensity  of  Mr.  Adams  to  b^  jealous  of  his 
friends,  Mr.  H.,  after  stating  that  it  was  agreed  among  the 
federalists  in  1796,  when  the  presidential  office  became 
vacant  by  the  declension  of  Gen.  Washington,  that  Mr. 
Adams  and  Mr.  Pinckney  should  be  equally  supported, 
leaving  it  to  casual  accession  of  votes  in  favor  of  the  one 
or  the  other  of  them  to  turn  the  scale  between  them,  says, 
"  it  is  true  that  a  faithful  execution  of  this  plan  would 
have  given  Mr,  Pinckney  a  better  chance  than  Mr,  Adams, 
nor  shall  it  he  concealed  that  an  issue  favorable  to  the  for- 
mer would  not  have  heen  disagreeable  to  me.  *  *  *  My 
position  was,  that  if  chance  should  decide  in  favor  of  Mr. 
Pinckney  it  probably  would  not  be  a  misfortune,  since  he, 
to  every  essential  qualification  for  the  office,  added  a  tem- 
per far  more  discreet  and  conciliatory  than  that  of  Mr. 
Adams."  {^Letter  p.  11,  12.)  Now  let  us,  for  one  mo- 
ment, look  at  this  project,  and  first,  let  me  remark  that 
the  public  proceedings  and  papers  of  that  day,  (1796,) 
show  as  clearly  that  Mr.  Adams  was  the  candidate  of  the 
federal  party  for  president,  as  that  Mr,  Jefferson  was  the 
candidate  for  that  office,  in  1800,  of  the  republican  party 
Probably  not  one  out  of  a  thousand  of  the  federalists, 
dreamed  of  Mr.  Pinckney  for  president.  This  General 
H  must  have  known.  He  knew,  too,  that  the  southern 
states  generally  would  vote  for  Mr.  Jefferson.  Is  it  not 
probable  that  he  knew,  (certainly  he  had  good  reason  to 
believe,)  that  South-Carolina  would  do  what  she  actually 
did  do,  give  eight  votes  to  Mr.  Jefferson  and  eight  to  their 
own  favorite  citizen,  Pinckney  1     If  then,  the  plan  of 


150  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

Gen.  H.  had  been  carried  out  and  the  northern  federal 
states  had  given  an  equal  number  of  votes  to  Mr.  Adams 
and  Mr.  Pinckney,  Gen.  H.  must  have  known  Pinckney 
would  have  been  elected  president  contrary  to  the  expec- 
tations and  wishes  of  ninety-nine  hundredths  of  the  fede- 
ralists. Would  this  have  been  fair  1  Would  it  have  been 
honorable  ?       •       *        •  > 

Mr.  Hamilton  complains  that  Mr.  Adams  spoke  un- 
kindly of  him,  and  was  jealous  of  him.  Is  it  matter  of 
surprise  that  Mr.  Adams  should  have  so  spoken  and  felt  1 
He  and  his  friends  must  have  discovered  the  plot.  The 
votes  given  for  Ellsworth  and  Jay  in  the  New-England 
states  prove  this,  {seep.  102.)  These  yankees  discovering 
that  a  trick  was  about  to  be  played  upon  them,  were  very 
quiet,  but  eventually  played  a  yankee  trick  upon  the  plot- 
ters. Mr.  Hamilton  says  "  Mr.  Adams  never  could  for- 
give those  engaged  in  this  plan;"  but  for  my  part  I  cannot 
deem  him  blamable  for  remembering  and  distrusting 
those  who  formed  and  attempted  to  execute  it. 

Gen.  Hamilton  then  animadverts  with  great  severity  on 
many  of  the  measures  of  Mr.  Adams,  and  pronounces  his 
conduct  as  president  to  be  "  a  heterogenous  mass  of  right 
and  wrong."  Gen.  Hamilton,  towards  the  close,  says,  he 
"  does  not  advise  the  withholding  from  Mr.  Adams  a  sin- 
gle vote,  but  he  claims  an  equal  support  of  Mr.  Pinckney 
with  Mr.  Adams,"  (p.  51.)  He  says  he  intends  the  cir- 
culation of  that  letter  to  be  confined  to  narrow  limits. 
Now,  did  not  Gen.  H.  know  that,  in  this  country,  you 
might  as  well  attempt  to  confine  the  light  of  the  sun,  as 
the  matter  contained  in  a  printed  sheet,  when  once  given 
to  the  public  1 

Again,  did  not  that  sagacious  politician  know  that  to 
impair  the  confidence  of  the  public,  or  any  considerable 
portion  of  the  federal  party,  in  Mr.  Adams,  at  that  par- 
ticular juncture,  would  be  fatal  to  the  federal  cause  in 


1800.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  151 

Americaj  and  would  render  certain  the  event  he  so  much 
deprecated  in  his  letter  to  Mr.  Jay — the  election  of  Mr. 
Jeflferson.  Why,  then,  should  he  have  written  and  pub- 
lished this  letter  1  Why,  in  1796,  did  he  deliberately 
concoct  a  scheme,  which,  had  it  been  successful,  must 
have  thrown  the  federal  party  into  utter  confusion,  and 
thwarted  the  ardent  and  anxious  wishes  of  an  immense 
majority  of  his  political  friends  1  Did  he  suppose  that 
the  election  of  a  southern  president,  even  if  he  was  a  mis- 
chievous democrat,  would  hasten  the  elevation  to  the  first 
office  in  the  nation  of  the  great  northern  financier"?* 

The  friends  of  Col.  Burr  charged  Gen.  Hamilton  with 
inducing  Mr.  David  A.  Ogden  to  call  on  Col.  Burr,  previ- 
ous to  the  election  by  the  house  of  representatives,  osten- 
sibly with  a  view  to  ascertain  what  would  be  his  course 
of  conduct  towards  the  federalists,  if  elected  president;  but 
really  for  the  purpose  of  destroying  his  standing  with  the 
republican  party  by  drawing  him  out  on  that  subject. 
This  however,  appears  not  to  be  correct,  from  the  state- 
ment made  by  Mr.  Ogden,  in  the  Morning  Chronicle,  in 
the  year  1802.  Indeed,  if  Mr.  O.  had  not  made  this 
statement,  no  man  would  have  believed  that  Gen.  Hamil- 
ton could  have  descended  to  such  trickery.  He  was  en- 
tirely incapable  of  anything  like  meanness.     It  is  however, 


•  It  would  seem  that  as  commander-in-chief  of  the  army  of  the  United  States, 
Gen.  Hamilton  made,  in  the  summer  of  1800,  a  tour  through  some  of  the  New- 
England  states.  A  writer  in  the  Boston  Independent  Chronicle,  who  claims  to  be 
a  friend  of  John  Adams,  over  the  signatureofManlius,  charges  that  the  General's 
visit  was  political,  having  for  its  object  the  prostration  of  Mr.  Adams.  On  that 
tour  Gen.  Hamilton  is  charged  with  predicting  among  his  friends — and  the  names 
of  Messrs.  Pinckney,  Ames,  and  Cabot,  are  mentioned  as  some  of  them — that  "If 
Mr.  Pinckney  was  not  elected  president  a  revolution  would  be  the  consequence ; 
and  that  within  the  next  four  years  he,"  (Hamilton,)  "  should  lose  his  head  or  be 
the  leader  of  a  triumphant  army." 

I  have  been  unable  to  find  a  contradiction  of  this  story  in  the  federal  paperfi 
published  during  that  year;  but  the  style  of  conversation  is  so  unlike  that  which 
■was  geneally  adopted  by  Gen.  Hamilton,  I  cannot  credit  it. 

The  communication  of  Manlius  will  be  found  in  the  Albany  Register  of  Aq. 
gust  12,  IflOO 


152  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

certain,  that  as  between  Mr.  Jefferson  and  Mr.  Burr,  Gen. 
Hamilton  was  in  favor  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  so  advised  his 
friends  in  congress.  He  considered  Jefferson  the  least 
dangerous  man  of  the  two. 

On  the  first  Tuesday  of  November  the  new  legislature 
convened,  and  Samuel  Osgood  of  New-York,  was  chosen 
speaker. 

The  governor,  in  his  speech,  alluded  to  the  appointment 
of  presidential  electors  as  the  cause  of  that  early  session, 
and  intimated  that  danger  might  arise  from  allowing  too 
much  excitement  to  prevail  at  times  when  the  chief  magi- 
strate of  the  nation  was  to  be  chosen.  He  therefore  re- 
commended the  suppression  of  all  inflammatory  feeling. 
The  residue  of  his  address  was  confined  to  local  objects 
proper  for  state  legislation.  He  recommended  the  pap- 
sage  of  an  act  for  the  call  of  a  convention  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  restricting  the  number  of  senators  and  members 
of  the  assembly. 

The  two  houses  immediately  proceeded  to  choose  elec- 
tors, for  president  and  vice-president.  The  senate  nomi- 
nated federal  electors  and  the  assembly  republican.  Upon 
a  joint  ballot  the  following  persons,  all  republicans,  were 
declared  duly  elected — Isaac  Ledyard  of  Queens,  Anthony 
Lispenard  of  New- York,  Pierre  Van  Cortland,  jun.  of 
Westchester,  James  Burt  of  Orange,  Gilbert  Livingston 
of  Dutchess,  Thomas  Jenkins  and  Peter  Van  Ness  of  Co- 
lumbia, Robert  Ellis  of  Saratoga,  John  Woodworth  of 
Rensselaer,  Jeremiah  Van  Rensselaer  of  Albany,  Jacob 
Acker  of  Montgomery,  and  William  Floyd  of  Suffolk. 

In  the  senate  the  federal  electoral  ticket  received  twen- 
ty-four votes,  and  the  republican  eighteen.  In  the  assem- 
bly the  republican  ticket  received  sixty- four  votes,  and  the 
federal  thirty-nine.  On  joint  ballot  the  republican  candi- 
dates for  electors  were  chosen  by  twenty-two  majority. 

On  the  7th  November  a  resolution  was  offered  in  the 


► 


1800.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  153 

assembly,  to  elect  a  council  of  appointment.  This  reso- 
lution was  opposed  by  the  federalists,  on  the  ground  that 
the  council  then  in  existence  had  not  been  in  office  for  a 
year  from  the  time  of  their  appointment.  The  same  ques- 
tion, it  will  be  recollected,  arose  in  1794.  The  only  dif- 
ference was,  the  parties  had  reversed  their  position.  The 
federalists  now  held  the  same  doctrine  and  urged  the 
same  arguments  that  the  republicans  did  then;  and  the  re- 
publicans now  adopted  the  arguments  of  the  federalists  in 
1794.     Such  is  the  consistency  of  partizans  ! 

The  resolution  was  adopted,  and  De  Witt  Clinton,  Am- 
brose Spencer,  Robert  Roseboom,  and  John  Sanders,  were 
elected  members  of  the  council  of  appointment  for  the 
ensuing  year.  All  were  republicans  except  Mr.  Sanders. 
It  may  however,  be  proper  to  mention,  that  the  old  coun- 
cil continued  to  act,  notwithstanding  the  choice  of  the 
new,  until  the  expiration  of  a  year  from  the  time  they 
were  chosen  j  for  I  find  them  in  session  on  the  23d 
January,  1801,  when  Solomon  Van  Rensselaer  was  ap- 
pointed adjutant  general,  in  lieu  of  Col.  Van  Home,  whose 
illness  rendered  him  incapable  of  performing  the  duties 
of  the  office.  And  here  I  cannot  help  remarking,  that 
when  this  question  was  agitated  in  1794,  the  assertion  by 
the  republicans,  that  the  old  council  would  have  a  right  to 
act  until  the  end  of  the  year,  was  treated  by  the  federa- 
lists as  preposterous,  and  as  an  attempt  at  a  dangerous  and 
unconstitutional  usurpation  of  power.  In  that  case  the 
old  council  did  not  insist  upon  their  right  to  continue  in 
office,  and  the  new  council  forthwith  proceeded  to  appoint 
a  judge  of  the  supreme  court,  (Judge  Benson;)  this  ap- 
pointment being  in  truth  the  cause  of  the  collision  which 
then  occurred. 

On  the  6ih  November,  John  Armstrong  was,  by  almost 
an  unanimous  vote,  elected  to  the  senate  of  the  United 
States,  in  place  of  John  Lawrence,  who  had  resigned. 


154  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1800. 

Gen.  Armstrong  was  connected  by  marriage  with  the  Liv- 
ingston family.  As  a  man  eminent  for  talents,  and  espe- 
cially as  one  of  the  most  powerful  political  writers  in 
America,  and  as  a  national  politician,  he  is  well  known; 
but  it  does  not  appear  that  either  at  that  or  any  other  time 
he  was  apparently  very  active  in  the  management  of 
the  political  concerns  of  this  state.  I  am  unacquainted 
with  the  causes  which,  at  this  period  of  high  political  ex- 
citement, procured  him  an  almost  unanimous  nomination 
from  the  senate  of  this  state,  which  we  have  seen  was  de- 
cidedly federal.  It  maybe  that  the  federalists  in  the  sen- 
ate, knowing  that  they  could  not  succeed  in  the  choice  of 
one  of  their  political  friends,  in  consequence  of  the  repub- 
lican majority  in  joint  ballot,  yielded  to  the  appointment 
of  General  Armstrong  as  the  least  exceptionable  republi- 
can candidate  for  that  office.  Gen.  Armstrong  had  been 
a  federalist,  and  continued  such  till  about  the  year  1797 
or  1798. 

The  answers  of  the  two  houses  to  the  governor's  speech, 
were  respectful.  That  from  the  senate  was  a  mere  echo, 
but  the  answer  of  the  assembly  was  interlarded  with  innu- 
endoes of  a  party  character. 

The  legislature,  on  the  8th  Nov.,  adjourned  to  the  last 
Tuesday  in  January. 

Before  the  members  separated,  and  on  the  evening  of 
the  8th,  the  republicans  nominated  George  Clinton  to  be 
supported  at  the  next  gubernatorial  election,  and  at  a  sub- 
sequent meeting  of  citizens  Jeremiah  Van  Rensselaer  was 
nominated  lieutenant  governor.  At  the  caucus  which 
nominated  Mr.  Clinton,  Henry  Rutgers  was  chairman,  and 
Smith  Thompson  was  secretary. 

On  the  same  day  the  federal  members  held  a  meeting 
and  addressed  Gov.  Jay,  highly  approving  of  his  official 
conduct,  and  requesting  him  to  stand  a  candidate  for  a  re- 
election.    By    a  written    answer  the   governor   thanKed 


1801.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  155 

them  cordially  for  the  approbation  they  had  expressed  of 
his  conduct,  and  for  the  evidence  their  address  afforded  of 
continued  confidence,  but  positively  declined  being  again 
a  candidate,  declaring  that  he  had  years  before  determined 
that  at  this  period  of  his  life  he  would  retire  from  all  pub- 
lic employment.  He  afterwards  repeated  the  same  decla- 
rations to  a  meeting  of  New-York  freeholders,(5ee  1  Jay.") 
His  communications  in  both  cases  were  affectionate  and 
patriotic,  and  in  accordance  with  the  purity  and  excellence 
of  his  private  and  public  character.  He  kept  his  resolu- 
tion most  firmly  and  religiously.  It  is  said  that  after  he 
went  into  retirement  he  would  not  even  read  the  political 
newspapers  of  the  day.  This  great  and  good  man  may 
have  occasionally  erred  in  judgment,  but  for  purity  of 
motive  and  character  no  man  ever  lived  who  exceeded 
him.  In  saying  that  he  may  have  erred  in  judgment,  I 
do  not  mean  that  he  was  not  a  man  of  great  powers  of 
mind  and  highly  capable  of  judging.  John  Jay  was  be- 
yond question  not  only  one  of  the  purest,  but  one  of  the 
ablest  of  the  revolutionary  statesmen  and  patriots.  Note  D. 

The  federalists  afterwards  nominated  Stephen  Van 
Rensselaer  for  governor  and  James  Watson  for  lieutenant 
governor. 

On  the  11th  of  February  the  new  council  met  the  ffov- 
ernor  for  the  first  time,  and  the  war  between  them  and  the^^^ 
governor  was  forthwith  commenced.  Gov.  Jay  nominated^*:- 
Jesse  Thompson  for  sheriff  of  the  county  of  Dutchessj 
which  nomination  was  non-concurred  in  by  a  majority  of 
the  council.  He  then  proceeded  to  nominate  seven  others 
for  the  same  office,  who  were  successively  rejected  by  the 
council.  He  made  some  other  nominations  which  were 
approved  by  the  council.  The  cpuncil  then  adjourned  to 
the  18th  of  the  same  month,  when  Robert  Williams,  after- 
wards celebrated  in  the  party  annals  of  the  state,  was  ap- 
pointed sheriff  of  Dutchess.     Williams  was  a  republican. 


156  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1801. 

On  the  24tli  the  council  again  met,  when  an  unsuccessful 
attempt  was  made  to  appoint  a  sheriff  of  the  county  of 
Schoharie,  and  also  of  the  county  of  Orange.  The  gover- 
nor nominated  Benjamin  Jackson  as  sheriff  of  Orange, 
who  was  negatived.  He  then  nominated  several  other 
persons  with  the  same  result.  Mr.  Clinton  thereupon 
nominated  John  Blake,  jun.  The  governor,  instead  of 
putting  the  question,  nominated  John  Nickolson.  On 
this  nomination  the  majority  of  the  council  refused  to  vote. 
The  parties  were  in  this  predicament,  the  governor  insist- 
ing on  the  exclusive  right  of  nomination,  and  the  council 
on  a  concurrent  right;  the  governor  refusing  to  put  the 
question  upon  any  nomination  made  by  a  member  of  the 
council,  and  the  council  refusing  to  vote  on  the  nomina- 
tions made  by  the  governor.  Upon  these  issues  being 
formed,  Mr.  Jay  stated  to  the  council  that  he  desired  time 
for  consideration  before  he  determined  on  the  course  which 
he  should  pursue;  and  thereupon  the  council  adjourned. 
Gov.  Jay  never  convened  them  again.  It  is  not  impro- 
bable that  Mr.  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer  were  rather 
desirous  to  produce  a  breach,  and  so  great  a  breach  as  to 
prevent  the  future  action  of  the  council  with  Gov.  Jay  as 
its  president.  While  he  occupied  that  station,  it  was  im- 
ossible  for  them  to  bestow  the  patronage  of  the  state  in 
all  respects  as  they  desired,  and  they  had  good  reason  to 
believe  that  the  election  in  April  would  result  in  the 
choice  of  a  governor  who  accorded  with  them  in  political 
views.  On  the  26th  February,  Gov.  Jay  sent  a  message 
to  the  assembly  setting  forth  his  difficulties  with  the  ma- 
jority of  the  council  and  the  causes  of  those  difficulties. 
He  reminded  them  that  in  his  first  speech  after  his  election 
he  had  besought  the  legislature  to  pass  an  act  declaratory 
of  the  powers  of  the  governor  while  acting  as  president 
of  the  council;  that  the  legislature  had  neglected  to  act 
upon  that  recommendation;  that  in  the  absence  of  all  le- 


> 


1801.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  157 

gislative  direction  he  was  bound  to  act  according  to  his 
own  views  of  the  true  construction  of  the  twenty-third 
article  of  the  constitution  j  that  he  conscientiously  believ- 
ed that  the  constitution  vested  in  the  governor  the  exclu- 
sive right  of  nomination;  and  this  being  his  sincere  and 
honest  opinion,  he  should  violate  his  oath  were  he  to  yield 
the  right  to  the  council.  He  was  not  surprised,  he  said, 
that  the  council  should  claim  a  concurrent  right  of  nomi- 
nation, because  that  claim  had  been  before  made,  and  be- 
cause intelligent  men  might  differ  as  to  the  propriety  of 
that  claim  J  but  he  complained  of  the  council  for  refusing 
to  vote  on  his  nominations.  This  course  of  conduct,  if 
carried  out,  might  result  in  establishing  a  claim  of  exclu- 
sive nomination  by  the  senators  who  were  members  of  the 
council.  He  concluded  by  asking  the  directions  of  the 
legislature.  The  assembly,  however,  resolved  that  it  was 
a  constitutional  question  to  be  decided  not  by  them,  but  by 
the  governor  and  council.  The  governor  also  addressed 
the  chancellor  and  judges  of  the  supreme  court,  and  re- 
quested their  opinion,  which  they  unanimously  declined 
giving,  on  the  ground,  that  the  expression  of  an  opinion 
by  them  was  not  within  the  scope  of  their  official  duties, 
but  entirely  extrajudicial. 

On  the  17th  March,  Messrs.  Clinton,  Spencer  and 
Roseboom  made  a  written  communication  to  the  assembly 
in  which  they  give  their  version  of  the  transactions  of  the 
governor  and  the  council,  which  does  not  materially  differ 
from  that  given  by  Gov.  Jay.  They  say  they  have  only 
in  one  instance  claimed  the  right  of  nomination,  (the  case 
of  Mr.  Blake,)  but  they  insist  they  have  such  right,  and 
they  go  into  a  long  train  of  reasoning  to  support  that  po- 
sition. They  say  the  right  has  never  been  yielded  by  the 
council,  (although  it  will  be  remembered  Gov.  Clinton 
protested  against  it;)  on  the  contrary,  they  refer  to  its 
exercise  under  Gov.  Clinton  in  the  case  of  Judge  Benson. 


158  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1801. 

This  commuication  is  written  with  some  degree  of  asperity, 
and  alludes  to  the  character  and  conduct  of  Mr.  Jay  in  a 
spirit  of  decided  hostility. 

Upon  looking  back  to  the  proceedings  of  the  senate  in 
1796,  it  is  impossible  to  avoid  some  surprise  and  regret  to 
find  Judge  Spencer,  not  satisfied  with  a  declaration  on  the 
part  of  the  senate  that  the  previous  official  conduct  of 
Gov.  Jay  inspired  the  members  of  that  house  with  confi- 
dence that  his  administration  would  be  in  every  respect 
beneficial  to  their  constituents,  but  insisting  that  the  senate 
should  declare  that  Mr.  Jay's  whole  official  life  had  "  inva- 
riably "  afforded  evidence  of  integrity,  patriotism  and 
wisdom;  which,  in  effect,  amounted  to  a  solemn  affirma- 
tion that  under  all  circumstances  and  on  all  occasions  it 
had  been  precisely  what  it  ought  to  have  been,  and  inva- 
riably free  from  error ;  thus  ascribing  to  him  a  perfec- 
tion incompatible  with  human  nature,  and  then  to  find, 
after  the  lapse  of  so  short  a  period  of  time,  the  name  of  the 
same  Judge  Spencer  subscribed  to  this  communication — a 
communication  which  contains  intrinsic  evidence  of  having 
been  partly,  if  not  wholly,  written  by  himself. 

Very  few  occurrences  of  much  interest  took  place  in 
either  house  of  the  legislature  during  the  remainder  of  this 
session.  On  the  6th  of  March,  Judge  Peck  reported  a 
bill  for  the  regulation  of  common  schools.  What  the 
particular  provisions  of  that  bill  were,  I  do  not  know,  for 
it  seems  it  was  not  passed  into  a  law.  A  bill  however, 
was  passed  before  the  legislature  adjourned,  directing  the 
raising,  by  means  of  four  successive  lotteries,  of  the  sum 
of  one  hundred  thousand  dollars,  twelve  thousand  five 
hundred  dollars  of  which  were  to  be  paid  to  the  regents  of 
the  university,  to  be  by  them  distributed  among  the  acade- 
mies in  such  manner  as  they  should  deem  most  proper; 
and  the  residue,  eighty-seven  thousand  and  five  hundred 
dollars,  was  to  be  paid  into  the  treasury,  to  be  appropriated 


1801.]  OP    NEW-YORK.  159 

for  the  encouragement  of  common  schools,  as  the  legisla- 
ture should  thereafter  direct.  This  bill  probably  grew  out 
of  the  project  proposed  by  Judge  Peck.  It  is  due  to  this 
plain,  unlettered  farmer  to  add,  that  he  was  intent  upon 
making  some  permanent  provisions  for  these  institutions, 
and  that  he  formed  the  project  of  establishing  a  common 
school  fund  in  pursuance  of  the  example  then  lately  fur- 
nished by  Connecticut,  the  state  from  whence  he  emigrated; 
that  he  never  lost  sight  of  it,  and  that  to  his  indefatigable 
and  persevering  efforts,  aided  by  Mr.  Adam  Comstock  of 
Saratoga,  another  uneducated  and  plain,  but  clear  sighted 
and  patriotic  man,we  are  principally  indebted  for  our  school 
fund  and  our  common  school  system.  What  military 
chieftain — what  mere  conqueror  by  brute  force,  has  con- 
ferred so  deep,  so  enduring  an  obligation  upon  posterity  1 

On  the  6th  April  a  law  was  passed  entitled  "  An  Act 
recommending  a  Convention." 

One  great  defect  in  the  constitution  of  1777  was,  that 
it  did  not  contain  within  itself  any  provisions  for  its  alte- 
ration or  amendment. 

According  to  that  constitution,  the  assembly  and  the 
senate,  especially  the  senate,  were  increasing  in  numbers 
to  a  degree  extremely  inconvenient.  Hence  the  gover- 
nor, in  his  speech,  invited  the  attention  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  that  subject,  and  the  recent  dispute  between  the 
governor  and  council  about  the  right  of  nomination  to 
office  convinced  all  reflecting  men  that  that  question 
should  be  definitively  settled.  Under  these  circumstances 
some  alteration  in  the  constitution  became  absolutely  ne- 
cessary. But  the  legislature  found  themselves  wholly 
unauthorised  to  pass  a  law  which  would  warrant  any  class 
of  men  to  alter  the  old  constitution,  or  make  a  new  one. 
However,  as  necessity  knows  no  law,  they  recommended 
to  the  people  to  choose  delegates  who  should  be  authorised 
solely  to  take  into  consideration  that  part  of  the  constitu- 


160  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1801. 

Hon  which  related  to  the  members  of  the  senate  and  as- 
sembly, and  to  determine  the  true  construction  of  the 
twenty-third  article  of  the  constitution.  The  act  further 
provided  that  the  delegates  should  be  equal  in  number 
from  the  respective  counties  to  the  members  of  the  assem- 
bly; that  they  should  be  chosen  in  the  month  of  August 
then  next,  by  all  freemen  over  twenty-one  years  of  age; 
that  the  delegates  thus  elected  should  meet  at  Albany 
on  the  second  Tuesday  in  October;  that  the  determina- 
tion of  the  convention  respecting  the  matters  therein  be- 
fore mentioned  should  be  entered  of  record  and  should 
thereupon  be  considered  as  a  part  of  the  constitution  of 
this  state. 

It  can  scarcely  be  necessary  to  add  that  on  the  17th  of 
February  Mr,  Jefferson  was,  by  the  states  in  congress, 
elected  president,  or  to  speak  of  the  manner  of  that  elec- 
tion. The  history  of  that  fearful  contest,  which  from  day 
to  day  threatened  a  dissolution  of  the  government,  is  well 
known.  The  news  of  the  result  was  received  by  the  re- 
publicans in  every  part  of  the  nation  with  acclamations  of 
joy,  but  perhaps,  nowhere  with  more  heartfelt  exultation 
than  in  the  state  of  New-York.  On  the  4th  of  March, 
meetings  were  held,  processions  were  formed,  and  orations 
were  delivered  in  almost  every  city  and  village  in  the 
state.  The  republican  members  of  the  legislature  and  the 
citizens  of  Albany,  and  citizens  from  other  parts  of  the 
state,  joined  in  the  general  festivity.  A  splendid  dinner 
was  provided  and  toasts  were  drank.  I  allude  to  the  pro- 
ceedings of  this  meeting  to  show  that  at  that  time,  what- 
ever views  individuals  may  have  entertained  of  the  recent 
conduct  of  Col.  Burr,  the  republican  party  generally  had 
confidence  in  him,  and  that  he  stood  high  in  their  esteem. 
The  Albany  Register,  then  the  organ  of  the  republican 
party  in  the  state,  in  reference  to  this  celebration,  says: — 
"  In  rejoicing  on  this  occasion  they,  [the  company,]  did 


1801.]  or     NEW-YORK.  161 

not  forget  the  important  success  of  the  republicans  in  the 
choice  of  that  firm  and  tried  patriot  Aaron  Burr  as  vice- 
president  of  the  United  States." 

Among  the  regular  toasts  drank,  the  next  after  the  toast 
to  Mr.  Jefferson,  was — 

'*  Aaron  Burr^  Vice-President  of  the  United  States — 
His  uniform  and  patriotic  exertions  in  favor  of  republi- 
canism eclipsed  only  by  his  late  disinterested  conduct." 

Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  was  present,  and  gave  the  follow- 
ing volunteer — 

"  Our  republican  brethren  of  the  south — May  we  always 
be  united  with  them  in  the  elevation  of  patriots  and  the 
promotion  of  good  principles." 

Could  any  one  imagine  that  the  bitter  waters  of  strife 
were  so  soon  to  succeed  the  copious  drafts  from  the  flow- 
ing bowl,  which  then  circulated  with  such  apparent  cordial 
conviviality  1  Man  is  mutable — politicians  are  most  mu- 
table ! 

The  electioneering  campaign  between  Gov.  Clinton  and 
Gen.  Van  Rensselaer  was  opened  and  prosecuted  with 
great  spirit  and  vigor.  It  gives  me  pleasure  on  this  occa- 
sion, to  notice  one  circumstance  highly  honorable  to  Mr. 
Van  Rensselaer,  but  which,  indeed,  is  in  perfect  keeping 
with  the  character  and  conduct  of  that  good  man. 

It  had,  it  seems,  been  given  out,  probably  by  some  ot 
his  over  zealous  friends,  that  those  of  his  tenantry  who 
■were  in  arrears  in  the  payment  of  their  rent,  (and  there 
were  probably  thousands  who  were  so,)  if  they  refused  to 
vote  for  him  would  be  prosecuted  for  those  arrears.  Upon 
this  report  coming  to  the  ears  of  the  patroon  he  forth- 
with published,  in  all  the  papers  printed  in  Albany  and 
Rensselaer  counties,  that  the  report  was  wholly  untrue. 
He  assured  his  tenants  that  he  wished  them  to  vote  as  in 
their  judgment  their  duty  to  the  country  required,  and 
that  no  man  should  be  prosecuted  who  voted  against  him. 

11 


162  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1801. 

After  such  a  noble  and  magnanimous  declaration,  I  am 
not  at  all  surprised  that  in  the  county  of  Albany  the  pa- 
troon  received  two  thousand  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight 
votes,  while  Gov.  Clinton  received  but  seven  hundred  and 
fifty-five.  This  vote  \vas  equally  honorable  to  those  who 
gave  as  to  him  who  received  it.  The  general  result  of 
the  election  however,  in  the  state,  was  in  favor  of  the  re- 
publican party.  Gov.  Clinton  was  chosen  by  more  than 
four  thousand  majority,  and  a  majority  of  republicans 
were  elected  members  of  the  assembly. 

We  have  thus  seen  a  great  party,  which  had  for  twelve 
years  been  in  the  ascendancy  in  the  nation,  and  the  greater 
part  of  that  time  had  controlled  the  political  destinies  of 
the  state  of  New-York  j  a  party  which  claimed  for  its 
head  and  leader  one  of  the  greatest  and  best  men  who  ever 
existed  in  any  age  or  country — the  immortal  Washington; 
a  party  which  contained  in  its  ranks  a  majority  of  the  emi- 
nent sages  and  patriots  of  the  revolution,  and  an  host  of 
men  possessing  talents  of  the  highest  order,  and  justly  dis- 
tinguished for  their  public  and  private  virtue,  prostrated  by 
the  fiat  of  the  people  of  this  state  and  of  the  United  States, 
expressed  through  the  polls  of  election.  I  should  assume 
too  much,  w^ere  I  to  attempt  to  speculate  on  the  causes 
which  produced  this  great  civil  revolution.  I  may,  how- 
ever, be  permitted  to  mention  one  leading  error,  which  in 
my  opinion,  was  embraced  by  the  prominent  federalists, 
and  which  gradually  extended  itself  among  their  ranks. 
They  did  not  properly  appreciate  the  intelligence  and 
good  sense  of  the  mass  of  the  community.  They  con- 
sidered them  as  incapable  of  judging  what  was  for  their 
best  good.  It  is  said  General  Hamilton,  in  addressing  a 
mass  meeting  in  New^-York,  told  the  people  that  they 
themselves  were  their  own  worst  enemies.  It  was  not 
discreet  to  make  such  a  declaration  had  it  been  true;  but, 
in  my  judgment,  it  is  not  true.     Although  there  are  many 


1801.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  1C3 

among  us  who  are  incapable  of  judging  of  the  merits  of 
great  political  measures,  yet  in  every  community,  in  every 
neighborhood,  and  I  may  add,  among  every  twelve  men, 
promiscuously  gathered,  in  the  most  benighted  corners  of 
the  state,  you  will  find  some  men  of  good  sound  common 
sense,  very  capable  of  weighing  and  deciding  upon  ques- 
tions upon  which  they  are  required  to  decide  and  act.  It 
was  this  unjust  estimate  of  the  intelligence  and  virtue  of 
the  mass  of  the  people,  which  induced  the  federalists  to 
sigh  for  a  more  energetic  government,  and  which  carried 
them  into  a  course  of  reasoning  and  action  which  resulted 
in  the  utter  overthrow  of  that  great,  talented  and  powerful 
party. 


164  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1801. 


CHAPTER    VI. 

FROM  MAY  I,  1801,  TO  MAY  1,  1802. 

In  the  southern  district  E.  L'Hommedieu  was  this  year 
re-elected  to  the  senate;  from  the  middle  James  G.  Gra- 
ham, Jacobus  S.  Bruyn  and  Peter  A.  Van  Bergen;  from 
the  eastern  John  Tayler,  Christopher  Hutton,  Abraham 
Van  Vechten,  Ebenezer  Clark  and  James  Van  Schoonho- 
ven,  the  two  first  named  being  republicans  and  the  three 
last  federalists,  and  from  the  western  district  Lemuel  Chip- 
man,  John  Myers  and  Isaac  Foote,  all  federalists,  were 
elected.  Thus,  it  will  be  seen,  there  were  six  republicans 
and  six  federalists  elected.  It  will  be  recollected  that  in 
April,  1800,  there  was  a  democratic  majority  in  the  west- 
ern district.  As  the  democratic  party  from  April,  1800, 
to  1801,  was  generally  on  the  gain,  it  is  probable  the  suc- 
cess of  the  federal  party  in  the  western  district  was  owing 
to  some  local  causes  with  which  we  are  at  present  unac- 
quainted. Perhaps  the  republican  candidates,  or  some  of 
them,  were  personally  unpopular.  In  the  assembly  a 
large  majority  of  republicans  were  elected. 

On  the  last  Tuesday  in  August,  and  the  two  succeeding 
days,  the  members  for  a  convention  to  amend  the  consti- 
tion  were  chosen,  in  pursuance  of  the  act  passed  in  April 
preceding,  of  which  I  have  already  spoken.  The  election 
resulted  in  the  choice  of  a  great  majority  of  republicans. 
Indeed,  from  the  tone  of  the  political  press  of  that  day,  it 
does  not  appear  that  the  federalists,  as  a  party,  made  any 
considerable  efforts. 

John  V.  Henry,  a  principal  and  leading  federalist,  was 
elected  from  Albany  county.  De  Witt  Clinton  was  cho- 
sen by  the  electors  of  the  county  of  Kings;  Aaron  Burr, 


1801.]  OF    NEW-YOBK.  165 

though  he,  as  well  as  Mr.  Clintonj  resided  in  New-York, 
was  elected  a  member  of  the  convention  from  the  county 
of  Orange;  William  P.  Van  Ness,  of  whom  we  have  pre- 
viously spoken  as  the  confidential  friend  of  Col.  Burr, 
was  elected  from  New- York,  and  Smith  Thompson,  at 
present  an  associate  judge  of  the  United  States  supreme 
court,  was  elected  from  the  county  of  Dutchess.  Daniel  » 
D.  Tompkins,  who  afterwards  made  so  distinguished  a 
figure  in  the  political  controversies  of  the  state,  made  his 
first  appearance  in  public  life  as  a  member  of  this  conven 
tion  from  the  city  of  New- York. 

The  convention  met  on  the  13th  of  October  at  Albany, 
and  organized  by  unanimously  electing  Col.  Burr  presi-    ' 
dent. 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  convention  was  re- 
stricted to  the  determination  of  two  questions  only.  The 
first  was,  to  fix  a  limit  to  the  number  of  senators  and 
members  of  assembly,  and  the  other  question  which  they 
were  authorised  to  decide  was  that  relating  to  "  the  true 
construction  of  the  twenty-third  article  of  the  consti- 
tution." They  soon  agreed  as  to  the  limitation  of  the 
number  of  the  members  of  the  two  houses  of  the  legisla- 
ture. De  Witt  Clinton  proposed  the  plan  which  was 
adopted.  In  fact  there  seems  not  to  have  been  much 
difficulty  in  settling  the  question  of  the  right  of  nomina- 
tion to  office  by  the  members  of  the  appointing  power  j 
for  on  the  question  of  adopting  the  clause  on  that  subject, 
there  were  but  fourteen  members  who  voted  in  the  nega- 
tive. This  unanimity  seoms  to  me  somewhat  extraordinary. 
Had  the  question  been  an  oiiginal  one,  that  is,  whether  it 
was  most  discreet  and  wise  that  the  members  of  the  coun- 
cil of  appointment  should  possess  a  concurrent  right  with 
the  governor  to  nominate  all  officers,  or  whether  the  right 
of  nomination  should  be  exclusively  vested  in  the  gover- 
nor, there  would  not  be  much  cause  of  surprise  that  party 


J  66  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1801. 

men,  although  engaged  in  amending  or  making  a  constitu 
tion,  should  have  unanimously  supported  the  doctrines  of 
their  party.  But  the  power  of  deciding  upon  the  expedi- 
ency or  propriety  of  exclusive  or  concurrent  nomination 
was  not,  by  the  act  to  which  the  convention  owed  their 
existence,  committed  to  them.  They  were  merely  autho- 
rized to  declare  "  the  true  consruction  of  the  twenty-third 
article  of  the  constitution,"  but  not  to  alter  the  terms  of  that 
article,  or  abolish  and  make  a  new  one  in  lieu  of  it.  The 
act  recommending  a  convention,  under  which  they  had 
been  elected  and  were  then  sitting,  vested  them  with  judi- 
cial powers  only.  They  were  merely  authorized  to 
expound  and  declare  the  true  intent  and  meaning  of  the 
convention  of  1777,  when  they  adopted  the  twenty-third 
article.  Perhaps  the  true  cause  of  the  apparent  unanimity 
of  opinion  on  this  occasion,  was,  that  both  the  federal  and 
republican  parties  had  in  their  conflicts  with  each  other, 
committed  themselves  in  favor  of  the  construction  that  the 
members  of  the  council  possessed  a  concurrent  right  of 
nomination  with  the  governor — the  federalists  in  1794, 
when  Judge  Benson  was  appointed,  and  the  republicans 
in  the  winter  of  1801. 

From  the  meagre  reports  of  the  proceedings  of  the  con- 
vention it  appears  that  Mr.  John  V.  Henry  was  the  only 
man  who  made  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  exclusive  risrht 
of  the  governor  to  nominate.  De  Witt  Clinton,  who  took 
the  other  side  of  the  question  and  voted  with  the  majority, 
lived  long  enough  to  have  reason  from  his  own  experience 
bitterly  to  deplore  that  the  convention  had  not  adopted 
the  construction  given  to  the  article  by  his  venerable  uncle, 
George  Clinton,  and  by  the  learned,  judicious  and  consci- 
entious John  Jay.  Here  then,  is  another  proof  that  legis- 
lators, and  especially  constitution-makers,  in  passing  gene- 
ral laws  and  establishing  general  rules,  should  never  act 
from  party  considerations.     William  P.  Van  Ness  was 


1801.]  or   NEW-YORK.  167 

one  of  the  fourteen  who  voted  against  this  construction  of 
the  constitution,  and  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  was  another. 
Precisely  twenty  years  afterwards,  in  the  convention  of 
1821 J  Gov.  Tompkins  referred  to  his  conduct  on  this 
occasion  with  self-satisfaction  and  just  cause  of  triumph. 
He  said,  [Debates  in  the  Convention j p.  116,]  "  The  con- 
vention of  1801  was  assembled  to  sanction  a  violent 
construction  of  the  constitution.  Then,  the  maxim  was, 
to  strip  the  governor  of  as  much  power  as  possible.  Now, 
gentlemen  are  for  giving  him  more  power.  In  the  con- 
vention of  1801  he  was  opposed  to  retrenching  the  power 
of  the  executive.  To  him  it  was  a  proud  triumph,  that  at 
the  age  of  twenty-six,  he  stood  alone  against  the  then 
dominant  party;  and  he  believed  that  there  were  members 
who  would  now  be  proud  if  it  could  be  said  that  they  had 
taken  the  same  ground." 

Gov.  Tompkins  was  mistaken  in  saying  that  he  was  the 
only  republican  who  took  this  course.  William  P.  Van 
Ness  was  with  him,  a  circumstance  which  he  had  no  doubt 
forgotten.  Ought  not  this  incident  in  the  life  of  Tomp- 
kins to  admonish  young  politicians  to  act  according  to  the 
dictates  of  their  own  consciences,  without  regard  to  the 
popular  breeze  which  at  the  moment  may  happen  to  agi- 
tate the  political  atmosphere  1 

The  reader  will  recollect  that  the  rupture  between  Gov. 
Jay  and  his  council  took  place  on  the  24th  of  February, 

1801,  and  that,  although  he  continued  in  office  until  July 
following,  he  never  again  called  the  council  together. 
He  will  also  bear  in  mind  that  the  council,  consisting  of 
De  Witt  Clinton,  Ambrose  Spencer,  John  Sanders  and 
Robert  Roseboom,  continued  in  office  till  the  winter  of 

1802.  On  the  8th  of  August,  1801,  Gov.  Clinton  invited 
a  meeting  of  the  council. 

The  proceedings  of  this  council,  after  Mr.  Clinton  was 


168  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1801. 

inducted  into  office,  were,  at  the  time,  the  subject  of  much 
complaint  and  severe  animadversion. 

It  has  often  been  remarked  by  citizens  and  politicians 
of  our  sister  states,  that  the  action  of  political  parties  in 
the  state  of  New-York  was  to  them  unaccountable  and 
mysterious.  They  saw  men  elevated  to  distinguished 
stations  many  times,  without  any  apparent  cause  of  such 
elevation  ;  they  saw  others  assailed  and  denounced,  and 
they  witnessed  the  total  prostration  of  men  high  in  office, 
and  proscribed  even  by  the  party  professing  to  support 
the  same  measures  and  holding  the  same  political  princi- 
ples as  those  who  were  thus  cast  out  of  the  political 
church,  without  even  an  attempt  to  charge  the  proscribed 
individuals  with  either  a  want  of  talent,  of  official  miscon- 
duct, of  immorality,  or  of  heresy  in  their  political  princi- 
ples. Hence,  hundreds  of  strangers  have  said  to  me  that 
the  politics  of  New-York  were  to  them  a  perfect  enigma. 
The  cause  of  this  mysterious  development  of  the  action  of 
parties  will,  I  think,  be  in  a  great  measure  found  in  the 
manner  in  which  the  appointing  power  executed  its  func- 
tions, after  the  alteration  of  the  constitution  by  the  con- 
vention of  1801. 

In  Vermont,  and  in  several  other  of  the  United  States, 
nearly  all  the  appointments  are  made  by  the  most  nume- 
rous branch  of  the  legislature,  and  in  other  slates  they  are 
made  by  the  governor  and  senate.  In  cases  where  so 
many  men  are  required  to  pass  upon  the  fitness  of  an 
appointment,  it  is  difficult,  and  generally  speaking,  impos- 
sible to  distribute  the  state  patronage  for  the  purpose  of 
advancing  the  interest  or  influence  of  any  individual,  or 
any  particular  clique  of  indi\-iduals.  Some  of  the  many 
persons  who  hold  the  appointing  power,  will  discover  the 
object  of  the  prime  movers  and  expose  and  denounce  them. 
Exposure  forthwith  puts  an  end  to  the  successful  prosecu- 
tion of  individual  ambitious  projects,  whose  success  depends 


1801.]  OF     NEW-yORK.  169 

on  the  bestowment  of  state  patronage.  In  states  where 
the  governor  possesses  the  sole  power  of  nominating  or 
appointing  to  office,  he,  feeling  his  responsibility  to,  and 
his  dependence  upon  the  whole  people,  dare  not,  in  gene- 
ral, prostitute  his  power  to  the  promotion  of  individual 
interests  and  views.  These  checks  could  not  be  brought 
effectually  to  bear  on  the  members  of  the  council  of  appoint- 
ment. They  were  commonly  men  who,  like  Mr.  Clinton 
and  Mr.  Spencer,  were  about  to  retire  from  the  legislature 
and  who  cherished  high  and  ambitious  projects;  or,  like  Mr. 
Robert  Roseboom,  honest  and  unpretending,  but  who  were 
suddenly  raised  from  a  mediocrity  of  standing  in  life,  and 
in  the  legislature,  to  the  possession  of  great  power.  This 
last  sort  of  men,  for  the  space  of  one  year,  were  followed, 
caressed  and  flattered;  but,  on  the  expiration  of  that  year, 
when  they  ceased  to  be  members  of  the  council,  they  in- 
stantly fell  back  to  the  position  in  society  and  in  the 
public  eye,  which  they  formerly  occupied.  They  remind 
one  of  the  transitions  produced  by  the  power  of  magic,  as 
detailed  by  the  author  of  the  Arabian  Night's  tales.  Like 
the  player  who,  while  clothed  with  royal  habiliments  and 
enacting  Julius  Caesar  or  Richard  the  Third,  excites  your 
admiration  and  perhaps  your  veneration  and  awe,  yet,  the 
moment  the  curtain  drops,  he  is  transformed  to  a  street 
stroller,  about  whom,  individually,  you  think  little  and 
care  less.  It  is  evident  that  neither  of  these  classes  of 
men,  while  members  of  the  council  of  appointment,  could 
feel  that  high  sense  of  responsibility  to  the  people  which 
the  genius  of  our  government  demands  from  officers  pos- 
sessing such  important  delegated  powers.  Besides,  it  was 
often  difficult  to  ascertain  who  ought  to  be  charged  with 
the  sin  of  an  improper  appointment.  The  ayes  and  noes 
are  not  entered  on  the  minutes  of  the  council  unless  ex- 
pressly directed  by  the  dissenting  councillors.  An  incom 
petent  and  dishonest  man  was  appointed  a  justice  of  the 


170  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1801. 

peace  in  your  neighborhood.  A.  B,  C.  and  D.  arc  mem- 
bers of  the  council.  Charge  A.  with  the  improper  act, 
and  ten  to  one  he  would  tell  you,  "  I  had  nothing  to  do 
with  it,"  and  that  he  either  voted  against  it  or  had  no  re- 
collection of  the  transaction^  and  the  same  answer  might 
be  given  by  B.  C.  and  D. 

From  this  hasty  view  of  the  council  of  appointment, 
one  cannot  fail  of  perceiving  that  it  constituted  a  branch 
of  the  government  which  would  be  likely  to  be  wielded 
for  the  immediate  benefit  of  the  councillors  themselves,  or 
that  its  members  were  extremely  liable  to  become  the  tools 
of  artful  and  designing  men,  either  in  or  out  of  the  legisla- 
ture. 

Mr.  Clinton  and  Mr.  Spencer  were  both  young  men, 
and  after  the  latter  abandoned  the  federal  party,  they  be- 
came cordial  and  confidential  friends.  Mr.  Clinton  was 
then  but  thirty-two  years  old.  Both  were  ambitious  ani 
highly  talented.  Mr.  Spencer  was  already  distinguished 
as  a  lawyer,  and  Mr.  Clinton,  from  his  near  relationship 
with  the  governor,  the  talents  he  had  displayed  as  a  writer 
and  his  energy  as  a  politician  and  legislator,  was  viewed 
by  all  as  a  person  who  might  reasonably  entertain  high 
expectations  in  public  life.  These  gentlemen  were  under- 
stood as  acting,  and  no  doubt  did  act,  in  perfect  concert 
as  members  of  the  present  council;  but  a  general  impres- 
sion prevailed  that  Mr.  Clinton  was  the  leader  of  the  two, 
and  of  course  the  master  spirit  which  controlled  the  coun- 
cil ;  Mr.  Roseboom  on  all  important  questions,  following 
the  lead  of  the  other  two  republican  members.  Mr.  Clin- 
ton, on  his  arrival  in  Albany,  previous  to  the  first  meeting 
of  the  council  after  Gov.  Clinton  was  seated  in  the  guber- 
natorial chair,  caused  it  to  be  publicly  made  known  that 
in  his  judgment  the  heads  of  the  executive  departments  of 
the  state  ought  to  be  composed  of  men  who  accorded  Avith 
the  majority  of  the  people  of  the  state  in  their  political 


1801.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  171 

viewsj  and  that  the  minor  offices  ought  to  be  equally  dis- 
tributed between  each  party  according  to  their  respective 
numbers.  His  views,  as  represented  by  the  Albany  Re- 
gister, on  the  subject  of  appointments,  were  substantially 
the  same  as  those  expressed  by  Mr.  Jefferson  in  his  cele- 
brated letter  to  the  New-Haven  merchants,  in  answer  to 
their  remonstrance  against  the  removal  of  the  collector  of 
that  port  and  the  appointment  of  Mr.  Bishop.  Even  this 
line  of  conduct,  moderate  as  it  may  now  seem,  was  carry- 
ing the  exercise  and  influence  of  the  appointing  power 
much  farther  than  had  been  done  by  any  preceding  admi- 
nistration. Gov.  Clinton,  during  the  eighteen  years  he 
had  administered  the  government,  never  in  a  single  in- 
stance had  consented  to  the  removal  of  an  officer  on 
account  of  his  political  opinions  and  without  proof  of 
incompetence  or  misconduct;  and  even  then  not  without 
notice  having  been  given  to  the  incumbent,  and  opportu- 
nity afforded  him  to  make  his  defence  before  the  council. 
Gov.  Jay  professed  to  adhere,  and  I  presume  did  himself 
adhere,  to  the  same  rule  of  action,  although  there  were, 
as  we  have  seen,  one  or  two  removals  from  small  offices 
without  notice  to  the  incumbents,  and  without  any  cause 
appearing  on  the  journals  of  the  council.  But  these 
removals,  it  is  fair  to  presume,  were  made  by  the  members 
of  the  council  against  the  wishes  of  Mr.  Jay.  It  strikes 
me,  however,  that  there  is  no  just  cause  to  complain  of  the 
rule  of  action  which  Mr.  Clinton  declared  would  govern 
his  conduct  as  a  councillor.  The  public  interest  certainly 
requires  that  the  heads  of  the  executive  department  should 
entertain  the  same  views,  on  all  great  political  questions, 
as  the  chief  executive,  otherwise  jealousies  will  grow  up 
and  obstructions  will  be  likely  to  be  thrown  in  the  way 
of  the  action  of  one  department  by  the  other,  and  the 
governmental  machine,  instead  of  each  part  moving  in 
unison  with  all    the    other   parts,  will    be  checked   and 


172  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1801. 

clogged  in  its  operation;  and  as  respects  the  inferior  offi- 
ces surely  no  party  in  the  minority  ought  to  complain  if 
they  have  a  proportion  of  the  offices  and  emoluments 
equal  to  their  numbers  when  compared  with  the  party  in 
the  majority.  But  when  the  public  once  learned  that 
office  and  its  emoluments  were  to  be  conferred  on  accoimt 
of  the  political  opinion  held  by  the  candidate,  both  Mr. 
Jefferson  and  Mr.  Clinton  soon  must  have  been  convinced 
that  the  importunity  of  political  friends  could  not  be  re- 
sisted, and  accordingly  they  themselves  were  the  first  to 
violate  their  own  rules. 

When  the  political  control  of  the  state  was  transferred 
from  the  federal  to  the  republican  party,  by  the  elections 
of  April  1800  and  1801,  the  republican  party  in  New-York 
may  be  said  to  have  had  three  leaders.  These  were  the 
Clintons,  the  Livingstons,  and  Aaron  Burr.  By  far  the 
greatest  number  of  people  belonged  to  that  portion  of  the 
republican  party  who  were  attached  to  Gov.  Clinton;  the 
Livingstons,  as  a  family,  were  numerous,  more  wealthy, 
and  hence  the  most  powerful;  and  Col.  Burr  possessed  a 
small  number  of  friends  and  admirers,  most  of  whom 
resided  in  the  city  of  New-York,  but  he  had  a  few  follow- 
ers in  almost  every  county  in  the  state.  He  had  no 
family  connexions,  nor  were  his  supporters,  generally 
speaking,  men  of  wealth.  He  himself  seems  always  to 
have  been  insolvent,  although  he  received  and  expended 
a  great  amount  of  money.  But  his  friends,  though  few 
in  number,  were  extremely  devoted  to  their  chief,  and 
most  of  them  were  men  of  considerable  political  tact  and 
uncommonly  active.  Before  the  council,  of  which  we 
are  now  speaking,  commenced  their  operations,  Burr  had 
rendered  himself  obnoxious  to  the  animadversions  and 
suspicions  of  the  republican  party  by  his  conduct  in  rela- 
tion to  the  pending  presidential  election,  and  there  is 
every  reason  to  believe  that,  notwithstanding  the  senti- 


1801.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  173 

ments  expressed  at  the  Albany  festival  in  the  winter  of 
1801,  held  in  commemoration  of  the  democratic  triumph 
in  the  election  of  Jefferson  and  Burr,  on  which  occasion 
Mr.  Burr  was  toasted  as  a  person  whose  "  uniform  and 
patriotic  exertions  in  the  cause  of  republicanism  were 
eclipsed  only  by  his  late  dismterested  conduct"  (referring 
undoubtedly  to  his  conduct  during  the  presidential  can- 
vass,) before  that  council  made  a  single  appointment,  it 
was  determined  by  the  Clintons  and  Livingstons  that 
Burr  and  his  immediate  partizans  should  no  longer  be 
considered  as  members  of  the  republican  party.  The 
great  offices  of  state  were  therefore  to  be  divided  between 
the  Clintons  and  the  Livingstons,  and  their  immediate 
friends. 

At  the  first  meeting  of  the  council  on  the  8th  of  August, 
John  Blake  was  appointed  sheriff  of  Orange  county,  and 
Peter  Vrooman  sheriff  of  Schoharie.  These  gentlemen 
Gov.  Jay  had,  on  the  24th  February,  refused  to  nominate, 
and  that  refusal  was  the  immediate  cause  of  the  breach 
between  him  and  the  council.  Sylvanus  Miller  was 
appointed  surrogate  of  New-York.  He  was  the  ardent 
friend  of  Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton,  and  continued,  through  all 
the  changes  of  fortune  which  were  then  in  reserve  for  his 
patron,  his  unwavering  supporter.  Mr.  Miller  at,  or 
shortly  before  his  appointment,  was  a  resident  of  the 
county  of  Ulster;  and  the  New- York  people  complained 
of  the  council  for  importing  a  surrogate  from  the  country 
for  that  city.  But  the  good  nature  and  prepossessing 
deportment  of  Mr.  Miller  soon  dissipated  those  complaints. 
Possessed  of  a  great  fund  of  anecdote,  fine  conversational 
powers  and  ready  wit,  which  was  dealt  out  in  such  a 
manner  as  never  to  wound  the  feelings  of  others,  and  of  a 
disposition  the  most  social,  he  soon  became  what  he  now 
is,  though  far  advanced  in  life,  the  favorite  of  all  who 
knew  him.     He,  for  many  years,  held  the  office  of  surro- 


174  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1801. 

gate,  which  in  the  great  city  of  New-York  is  an  highly 
important  office;  and  I  have  never  heard  him  charged 
with  official  misconduct.  Edward  Livingston,  then  a 
distinguished  member  of  congress,  was  created  mayor  of 
New-York.  Maj.  Daniel  Hale  was  removed  from  the 
office  of  secretary  of  state,  and  Doct.  Thomas  Tillotson 
was  appointed  in  his  place.  This  gentleman  was,  by 
marriage,  connected  with  the  Livingston  family.  I  be- 
lieve he  was  the  brother-in-law  of  the  chancellor.  John 
V.  Henry  was  removed  from  the  office  of  comptroller,  and 
Elisha  Jenkins  was  appointed  his  successor,  Mr.  Jen- 
kins was  a  merchant  of  the  city  of  Hudson.  His  ap- 
pointment to  this  office  was  undoubtedly  produced  by  Mr. 
Spencer.  Mr.  J.  abandoned  the  federal  party  in  company 
with  Mr.  Spencer,  and  has  ever  since  steadily  adhered  to 
his  political  fortunes.  From  the  principles  upon  which 
the  council  assumed  to  act,  as  declared  by  Mr.  Clinton, 
the  removal  of  Mr.  Henry  followed  as  a  matter  of  course; 
but  it  is  nevertheless  to  be  regretted  that  a  man  of  such 
pure  integrity,  high  principles  of  honor  and  distinguished 
talents,  could  not  have  been  retained  in  the  service  of  the 
state.  It  is  not  derogatory  to  Mr.  Jenkins  to  say,  he  was 
far  inferior  to  the  person  who  was  removed  in  order  to 
make  a  place  for  him. 

Mr.  Henry  was  so  deeply  disgusted  at  the  transaction, 
that,  at  the  moment  of  his  removal,  he  resolved  never 
again  to  accept  of  any  office,  but  devote  himself  entirely 
to  the  practice  of  his  profession.  That  resolution  he 
religiously  kept  to  the  end  of  his  life.  By  his  industry 
and  talent  he  established  a  professional  reputation,  in  my 
judgment,  infinitely  more  valuable  than  any  merely  politi- 
cal, or  rather  partizan,  reputation  which  has  been  achieved 
in  this  state.  The  council,  probably  in  order  further  to 
afford  a  demonstration  of  what  their  future  course  would 
be,  removed  Thomas  Mumfoid  from  the  paltry  office  of 


1801.]  OF     NEW- YORK.  175 

master  in  chancery  and  John  Richardson  from  the  office 
of  judge  of  the  court  of  common  pleas  for  the  county  of 
Cayuga.  As  these  removals  were  wholly  without  any 
other  cause  than  that  the  incumbents  entertained  political 
opinions  different  from  the  majority  of  the  council.  Gov. 
Clinton  caused  his  protest  against  them  to  be  entered  on 
the  journals  of  the  council.  In  other  cases  of  removals 
the  governor  refused  to  sign  the  minutes  of  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  council.  Thus  it  appears  that,  although  Gov. 
Clinton  had  been  the  great  object  of  attack  of  the  federa- 
lists, the  target  to  which  their  most  envenomed  arrows 
had,  for  years  gone  by  been  directed,  so  firmly  had  the 
principles  of  the  right  and  duty  of  every  freeman  to  form 
and  express  his  own  opinions  of  public  men  and  measures 
become  fixed  in  his  mind  during  the  revolutionary  struggle, 
that  this  venerable  patriot  could  not  bring  his  conscience 
to  consent  that  any  of  his  fellow-citizens  through  his  agen- 
cy, or  even  by  his  tacit  acquiescence,  should  be  subjected 
to  any  loss  on  account  of  the  frank,  open  and  independent 
exercise  of  such  right. 

At  the  next  meeting  of  the  council,  which  was  on  the 
11th  of  August,  Cadwallader  D.  Golden,  a  man  highly 
esteemed  for  his  talents  and  private  virtues,  and  a  descen- 
dant from  the  colonial  lieutenant  governor  of  that  name, 
was  removed  from  the  office  of  district  attorney,  and 
Richard  Riker  appointed  in  his  placej  Robert  Benson 
was  removed  from  the  office  of  clerk  of  the  city  of  New- 
York,  and  Teunis  Wortman,  a  young  man  of  talents,  but 
of  irregular  habits,  was  appointed  his  successor;  Richard 
Harrison,  a  celebrated  and  learned  lawyer,  was  removed 
from  the  office  of  recorder,  and  John  B.  Prevost  appoint- 
ed;  John  McKisson  was  appointed  clerk  of  the  circuit, 
and  William  Coleman  was  removed  to  make  place  for 
him.  Mr.  Coleman  was  then  a  young  man,  (a  native  of 
Massachusetts,)  of  very  respectable  attainments  asascho- 


176  POLITICAL    HISTORY.  [1801 

lar  and  considerable  talents  as  a  political  -writer.  After 
his  removal  Mr.  Coleman  established,  under  the  patronage 
of  Gen.  Hamiltonj  the  newspaper  called  the  Evening  Post, 
of  which  he,  (Mr.  C.,)  continued  the  sole  editor  until  his 
death.  The  Evening  Post  was  considered  the  organ  of 
Gen.  Hamilton's  political  views,  and  I  presume  generally 
promulgated  his  sentiments.  On  the  same  day  Conrad  E. 
Elmendorf  and  Thomas  R.  Gold,  the  latter  gentleman 
being  a  senator  from  the  western  district  and  an  eminent 
lawyer,  were  removed  from  the  office  of  district  attorney, 
and  Smith  Thompson  aud  Nathan  Williams  were  appoint- 
ed in  their  places. 

During  the  succeeding  sessions  of  this  council  various 
removals  were  made  of  clerks  of  counties,  sherifis  and 
other  county  officers.  Among  other  county  clerks  who 
were  removed,  Ebenezer  Foote  of  the  county  of  Delaware, 
was  removed  from  the  clerkship  of  that  county.  Mr. 
Foote  was  a  federalist  of  considerable  standing  and  influ- 
ence. He  had  been  a  senator  from  the  middle  district, 
and  in  the  year  1797,  when  Mr.  Spencer  was  a  member 
of  the  council,  was  appointed,  and  as  Mr.  F.  alleged,  was 
warmly  supported  by  Mr.  S.  Much  complaint  was  made 
about  this  removal,  and  a  writer  in  the  Albany  Register 
under  the  signature  of  a  Friend  to  Justice  in  justification 
of  the  removal  charged  Foote  with  official  mal-conduct. 
This  led  to  a  correspondence  between  Foote  and  Spencer, 
which  appeared  in  the  party  newspapers  of  the  day,  and 
was  afterwards  published  in  a  pamphlet  form  by  Mr. 
Foote.  Mr.  Philip  Gebhard  was  the  successor  of  Mr. 
Foote.  Previous  to  the  action  of  the  council  a  personal 
controversy  had  occurred  between  these  men,  in  the  course 
of  which  Mr.  Gebhard's  name  had  been  struck  from  the 
roll  of  attorneys  of  the  Delaware  common  pleas.  It  was 
charged  by  the  Frie?id  to  Justice  that  Foote  had  taken  a  very 
.ictive  part  and  had  used  unjustifiable  means  to  cause  Geb- 


1801.]  OF  NEW-YORK.  1T7 

hard  to  be  expelled  from  the  Delaware  bar.  Mr.  Foote,  in 
his  first  publication,  denies  these  charges.  He  alleges  that 
Mr.  Spencer  was  their  author,  and  charges  him  with  base 
and  unworthy  conduct  as  a  public  man  and  a  member  of 
the  council.  To  this  Mr.  Spencer  replied  that  he  had  no 
knowledge  of  the  production  of  the  "Friend  of  Justice," 
till  he  saw  it  in  print,  and  that  his  reasons  for  voting  for 
Mr.  F's  removal  were  different  from  those  assigned  by  the 
Friend  of  Justice.  In  speaking  of  Mr.  Foote's  removal, 
Mr.  Spencer  says,  "  It  was  an  act  of  justice  to  the  public, 
inasmuch  as  in  removing  you,  the  veriest  hypocrite  and 
the  most  malignant  villain  in  the  state,  was  deprived  of 
the  power  of  perpetrating  mischief."  He  adds,  in  his 
own  peculiar  style  of  severity  and  sarcasm,  *'  If,  as  you 
insinuate,  your  interests  have  by  your  removal  been  mate- 
rially affected,  then,  sir,  like  many  men  more  honest  than 
yourself^  earn  your  bread  by  the  sweat  of  your  brow." 

To  this  Mr.  Foote  replied,  giving,  or  claiming  to  give, 
a  sketch  of  Mr.  Spencer's  political  life,  charging  him  with 
being  an  applicant,  in  1797,  for  the  office  of  comptroller, 
and  offering  to  prove  it  if  he,  [Mr.  Spencer,]  would  ab- 
solve Thomas  Morris  from  all  honorary  obligations  to 
keep  secret  his  knowledge  of  the  application.  Mr.  Spen- 
cer replied,  and  denied  that  he  was  a  candidate  for  the 
office  of  comptroller,  and  he  called  for  proof  of  the  charge. 
He  further  stated,  "  To  facilitate  you  in  your  enquiry  I 
absolve  the  whole  world  from  injunctions  of  secresy  and 
the  restraints  of  delicacy  on  the  subject." 

This  correspondence  deserves  notice  only  for  the  reason 
that  it  affords  evidence  of  the  style  and  manner  in  which 
political  controversies  were  at  that  day  conducted;  and  as 
furnishing  proof  that  Judge  Spencer  was  not  a  candidate 
for  the  office  of  comptroller  at  any  time  before  he  aban- 
doned the  federal  party.  This  proof  is  important  because 
Judge  Spencer  is  still  charged,  (and  perhaps  some  believe 

12 


178  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1801. 

the  charge,)  with  having  deserted  the  federal  party  from 
feelings  of  resentment  growing  out  of  the  refusal  of  Gov. 
Jay  to  nominate  him  to  the  office  of  comptroller.  If  the 
charge  had  been  true,  the  fact  must  have  been  known  at 
the  date  of  this  correspondence,  and  after  this  public  defi- 
ance to  highly  excited  opponents,  is  not  their  failure  to 
produce  any  proofs  of  its  truth  decisive  evidence  that  none 
existed,  and  that  the  allegation  was  false  ? 

By  the  twenty-eighth  article  of  the  constitution  of  1777, 
it  was  required  that  "  new  commissions  should  be  issued 
to  judges  of  the  county  courts  other  than  the  first  judge, 
and  to  justices  of  the  peace,  once  at  the  least  in  three  years." 
When  this  new  commission  came  into  the  county  and  was 
promulgated,  all  judges  and  justices  of  the  peace  whose 
names  were  not  included  in  it  were  superseded  of  course. 
As  all  offices,  excepting  those  particularly  specified,  were 
declared  by  this  same  article  to  be  held  during  the  plea- 
sure of  the  council  of  appointment,  it  was  holden  that  new 
commissions  might  issue  at  the  pleasure  of  the  appointing 
power  at  any  time  short  of  three  years,  with  the  same 
effect  as  if  issued  at  the  expiration  of  three  years  from  the 
time  of  issuing  the  last  commission.  In  pursuance  of 
this  construction,  the  present  council,  and  whenever  the 
political  power  changed  from  one  party  to  the  other,  all 
subsequent  councils,  issued  new  commissions  to  most  of 
the  counties  in  the  state.  The  consequence  was,  that  by 
the  leaving  out  of  the  new  commissions  federal  judges  and 
justices,  and  inserting  the  names  of  republicans  in  their 
places,  the  political  power  and  influence  of  the  council 
was  carried  into  almost  every  neighborhood  in  the  state. 
The  tendency  of  this  practice  was  to  produce  an  impres- 
sion among  all  ranks  of  people  that  men  were  to  be  pun- 
ished or  rewarded  for  their  political  opinions  according  to 
their  standing  and  influence  in  society,  and  more  especially 
at  the  polls  of  the  election.     The  eflfect  naturally  was  to 


I 


1801.]  OF    NEW-rORK.  179 

create  a  corps  of  electioneerers  in  every  township  in  the 
state,  under  the  name  of  justices  of  the  peace,  and  thus 
judicial  officers,  who  of  all  others  ought  to  be  entirely  re- 
moved from  party  bias,  were  made  the  most  active  and 
zealous  combatants  in  the  political  arena. 

Chancellor  Livingston  had  become  incompetent  by  age 
longer  to  hold  his  office,  of  which  he  advised  the  governor; 
and  John  Lansing,  jr.,  chief  justice  of  the  supreme  court, 
was  thereupon  appointed  chancellor.  Mr.  Livingston  was 
soon  after  appointed  minister  to  France,  and  terminated  a 
brilliant  and  useful  public  life  by  a  successful  mission  » 
abroad,  in  which  he  had  the  good  fortune,  at  a  compara- 
tively trifling  expense,  to  negotiate  the  acquisition  of  the 
extensive  and  rich  territory  of  Louisiana  to  the  United 
States,  and  secure  forever  peaceable  and  convenient  access 
to  the  ocean  to  our  fellow-citizens,  located,  or  to  be  loca 
ted,  in  the  vallies  of  the  Mississippi  and  Ohio,  and  the 
great  and  almost  interminable  and  fertile  plains  of  the 
west. 

Judge  Benson  had  been  appointed,  under  what  w^as  called 
the  midnight  Act  of  John  Adams,  a  circuit  judge  of  the 
United  States,  on  the  3d  March,  1801,  and  had  of  course 
resigned  his  office  as  judge  of  the  supreme  court  of  this 
state.  This  resignation,  and  the  appointment  of  chief 
justice  Lansing,  chancellor,  caused  two  vacancies  on  the 
bench  of  the  supreme  court.  These  vacancies  were  not 
supplied  by  new  appointments  until  several  months  after 
they  happened,  and  loud  complaints  of  delay  were  made. 
The  particular  cause  of  this  delay  does  not  appear,  but  the 
federalists  publicly  charged  Mr.  Clinton  and  Mr.  Spencer 
with  a  design  to  appropriate  those  offices  to  themselves. 
It  is  possible  that  Mr.  Spencer  may  have  desired  a  judicial 
appointment,  but  the  previous  as  well  as  subsequent  course 
of  Mr.  Clinton's  life  affords  decisive  evidence  that  the 
suspicion,  as  to  him,  was  not  well  founded.     But  before 


180  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1802. 

the  expiration  of  the  year  after  this  council  commenced 
acting,  they  appointed  Morgan  Lewis  chief  justice,  and 
Brockholst  Livingston  and  Smith  Thompson  judges  of  the 
supreme  court. 

In  reviewing  the  appointments  made  by  this  council  it 
will  be  perceived  that  not  a  single  appointment  of  the 
least  importance  was  conferred  on  the  known  friends  of 
Col. Burr.  In  the  city  of  New-York  the  persons  selected  to 
fill  the  offices  seem  generally  to  have  been  the  personal  as 
well  as  political  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton;  but  of  the  great 
state  offices  the  Livingstons  had  much  the  greatest  share. 
If  there  was  an  implied  or  express  understanding  that  the 
offices  should  be  divided  according  to  the  wishes  of  the 
Clintons  and  Livingstons,  the  Livingstons  certainly  took 
the  lion's  part.  Chancellor  Livingston  was  undoubtedly 
by  the  aid  and  influence  of  Gov.  Clinton  appointed  on  a 
foreign  embassy;  at  any  rate  it  is  reasonable  to  infer  he 
would  not  have  received  the  appointment  had  Mr.  Clinton 
been  opposed  to  him,  Edward  Livingston  was  made 
mayor  of  New-York,  an  office  at  that  time  probably  worth 
ten  thousand  dollars  per  annum;  Doct.  Tillotson,  a  bro- 
ther-in-law of  the  chancellor,  was  created  secretary  of 
state;  Morgan  Lewis,  connected  by  marriage  with  the 
family,  was  elevated  to  the  office  of  chief  justice  of  the 
supreme  court;  Gen.  Armstrong,  who  was  in  the  same 
way  connected  with  the  Livingstons,  was  appointed  by 
the  legislature,  a  short  time  before.  United  States  senator, 
and  Brockholst  Livingston  and  Smith  Thompson,  whose 
wife  was  a  Livingston,  were  created  judges  of  the  supreme 
court.  It  is  nevertheless  but  an  act  of  simple  justice,  in 
this  place  to  add,  that  the  gentlemen  belonging  to  the 
Livingston  family  who  received  these  appointments  were 
all  of  them  men  of  high  character  for  talents,  and  in  all 
respects  well  fitted  for  the  offices  to  which  they  were 
respectively  appointed.     Edward  Livingston  was  not  only 


1802,]  OF     NEW-YORK.  181 

competent  to  execute  properly  the  duties  pertaining  to  the 
mayoralty,  but  all  will  now  admit  that  his  talents  qualified 
him  for  any  office  within  the  control  of  the  people  of  the 
state  or  nation.  The  reports  of  the  supreme  court  of  this 
state  are  enduring  monuments  of  the  learning  and  abilities 
of  both  Brockholst  Livingston  and  Smith  Thompson.  As 
a  man  of  genius  Livingston  was  unquestionably  the  supe- 
rior of  Thompson;  but  for  legal  acumen,  clearness  of  per- 
ception, and  logical  powers  of  mind,  there  are  few  if  any 
men,  in  this  or  any  other  country,  who  excel  Judge 
Thompson. 

The  legislature  met  at  Albany,  Jan.  26,  1802.  Thom- 
as Storm  of  the  city  of  New- York  was  chosen  speaker  of 
the  assembly. 

Nothing  remarkable  was  contained  in  the  governor's 
speech,  but  like  all  the  communications  of  George  Clinton 
it  presented  in  a  very  brief  form  the  general  condition  of 
the  state,  accompanied  with  suitable  and  judicious  remarks 
on  the  various  subjects  of  legislation,  which  in  the  judg- 
ment of  the  governor  demanded  the  attention  and  action 
of  the  legislature. 

On  the  third  of  February  the  assembly  elected  a  council 
of  appointment  for  the  ensuing  year.  It  consisted  of 
Benjamin  Hunting  from  the  southern,  James  W.  Wilkin 
from  the  middle,  Edward  Savage  from  the  eastern,  and 
Lemuel  Chipman  from  the  western  district.  Josiah  Ogden 
Hoffman  had,  for  a  long  time,  held  the  office  of  attorney 
general,  and  on  referring  to  the  removals  and  appointments 
by  the  preceding  council  it  will  be  perceived  that  although 
the  secretary  of  state,  comptroller,  &c.,  were  removed, 
Mr.  Hoffman  was  not  disturbed  in  the  enjoyment  of  his 
office,  notwithstanding  he  had  distinguisned  himself  as  one 
of  the  most  active  and  zealous  federalists. 

The  following  facts  will  account  for  the  forbearance  of 
the  council  of  1801  towards  Mr.  Hoffman. 


i82  POLITICAL    HISTOEY  [1802. 

When  Mr.  Spencer  was  a  member  of  the  federal  council 
in  1797j  an  attempt  was  made,  probably  on  the  suggestion 
of  Gov.  Jay,  or  possibly  by  some  of  the  friends  of  Mr. 
Jones  or  Mr.  Henry,  to  pass  a  resolution  and  enter  the 
same  on  the  minutes  of  the  council,  that  it  was  improper 
for  any  person  while  a  member  of  the  council  of  appoint- 
ment to  receive  an  office  from  that  body.  Mr.  Spencer 
opposed  the  adoption  of  that  resolution,  and  in  one  of  his 
letters  to  Mr.  Foote,  to  which  I  have  above  referred,  he 
assigns  the  reasons  of  his  opposition.  He,  no  doubt,  had 
fixed  his  eye  upon  the  office  of  attorney  general,  while  he 
was  a  member  of  the  council  in  1801;  but  as  the  propriety 
of  a  councillor's  receiving  an  office  from  a  body  of  which 
he  himself  constituted  a  fifth  part  had  been  so  recently  a 
subject  of  public  discussion,  Mr.  S.  no  doubt  felt  that  it 
Avould  be  indelicate  for  him  to  receive  the  office  in  ques- 
tion until  another  council  should  be  chosen  j  and  it  is  more 
than  probable  that  an  understanding  existed  between  Mr. 
Hoffman  and  Mr.  Spencer,  that  as  soon  as  a  new  council 
should  be  formed,  if  that  council  should  be  republican, 
Mr.  Hoffman  should  resign  his  office.  Accordingly,  at  the 
first  meeting  of  the  council  of  1802,  Mr.  Hoffman  resigned 
the  office  of  attorney  general,  and  Mr.  Spencer  was  ap- 
pointed in  his  place.     [  See  Mote  A.  end  of  Vol.  2.  J 

William  Stewart  of  Tioga  county,  a  brother-in-law  of 
Gov.  Clinton,  who  had  been  removed  from  the  office  of 
district  attorney  of  the  counties  of  Ontario,  Tioga,  &c.,by 
a  federal  council,  under  the  administration  of  Gov.  Jay, 
was,  on  the  same  day,  restored  to  that  office,  which  was 
vacated  by  the  resignation  of  Mr.  Nathaniel  W.  Howell  of 
Canandaigua. 

Very  few  other  appointments  of  any  importance  were 
made  by  this  council.  They,  however,  appear  to  have 
pursued  the  policy  of  their  immediate  predecessors  by 
tilling  the  offices  which  became  vacant  exclusively  with 


1802.]  OP    NEW-YORK.  183 

men  of  their  own  party  j  and  in  the  general  commissions 
of  the  peace  which  they  sent  into  several  counties,  they  left 
oflf  all  the  federal  judges  and  justices  of  the  peace  whom 
they  with  decency  could,  and  supplied  their  places  by  re- 
publicans. 

Under  the  constitution,  as  amended,  the  assembly  was 
to  consist  of  one  hundred  members,  and  an  apportionment 
was  made  by  a  law  of  this  session  giving  each  county  its 
share  of  representation  in  that  branch  of  the  legislature  in 
proportion  to  its  population;  but  no  other  law  of  any 
importance,  at  least  politically,  was  passed  during  this 
session.  Mr.  Clinton  introduced  a  resolution  proposing 
an  amendment  to  the  United  States  constitution,  so  that 
each  state  should  be  divided  into  districts,  and  the  people 
of  each  district  should  choose  one  elector  of  president  and 
vice-president,  and  also  requiring  the  electors  to  designate 
on  their  ballot  which  candidate  they  voted  for,  for  presi- 
dent and  whichfor  vice-president.  These  resolutions  were 
adopted. 

At  the  commencement  of  the  session  Gen.  John  Arm- 
strong resigned  his  seat  in  the  senate  of  the  United  States, 
and  on  the  9th  of  February  De  Witt  Clinton  was  chosen 
to  supply  his  place.  Mr.  Clinton  was  nominated  by  the 
assembly,  and  a  federalist  was  nominated  by  the  senate; 
but  at  a  meeting  of  the  two  houses,  on  joint  ballot  Mr. 
Clinton  received  eighty-two  votes  and  his  opponent  forty- 
five.  In  the  controversy  which  occurred  the  succeeding 
summer,  between  Mr.  Clinton  and  Col.  JBurr  and  his 
friends,  the  latter  charged  the  former  with  much  manoeu- 
vering  and  bargaining  in  order  to  procure  the  resignation 
of  Gen.  Armstrong  and  the  election  of  Mr.  Clinton.  The 
writers  in  the  interest  of  Mr.  Burr,  affirmed  that  the  ap- 
pointment of  Doct.  Tillotson  as  secretary  of  state,  was 
made  on  the  condition  that  he  should  procure  the  resigna- 
tion of  Gen.  Armstrong;  but  these  allegations  are  entirely 


184'  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1802. 

void  of  any  shadow  of  proof.  Gen.  Armstrong  was  not 
the  man  who  would  permit  himself  to  be  made  an  article 
of  political  merchandise  or  traffic,  and  the  office  of  a  sena- 
tor of  the  United  States  being  for  any  cause  vacant,  who 
is  the  man  at  that  day  who  would  have  been  more  likely, 
without  factitious  aid,  to  receive  the  support  of  the  majo- 
rity of  the  republican  members  of  the  legislature  than  De 
Witt  Clinton  1 

The  legislature  adjourned  on  the  second  day  of  April. 

The  result  of  the  spring  election  was  decidedly  favora- 
ble to  the  republican  party.  In  the  assembly  a  large 
majority  of  democratic  members  were  returned,  and  all  the 
senators  chosen  that  spring  were  republicans. 

John  Schenck  was  elected  from  the  southern j  Solomon 
Sutherland  and  Abraham  Adriance  from  the  middle,  and 
Jacob  Snell,  Matthias  B.  Talmadge,  Asa  Danforth,  Joseph 
Annin  and  George  Tiffany  from  the  western  district. 
The  eastern  district,  under  the  new  arrangement,  was  not 
entitled  to  elect  any  senators  this  year. 


1802.]  POLITICAL    HISTORY  186 


CHAPTER  VII. 

FROM  MAY  ;,  1802,  TO  MAY  1,  1803, 

Immediately  after  the  result  of  the  election  was  known, 
the  war  between  Aaron  Burr  and  his  partizans,  and  the 
Clintons  and  Livingstons,  the  materials  for  which  had 
for  a  long  time  been  gathering,  burst  forth  and  was  car- 
ried on  with  extreme  asperity  and  bitterness. 

A  daily  paper  had  been  established  in  New- York,  call- 
ed the  American  Citizen,  which  was  considered  the  organ 
of  the  majority  of  the  democratic  partyj  but  was  under- 
stood to  be  more  especially  under  the  influenee  of  De 
Witt  Clinton.' '.  That  paper  first  broke  ground  against  Col. 
Burr,  and  openly  and  bitterly  denounced  him  as  a  traitor 
to  the  republican  cause,  and  in  proof  of  his  tr€ach€ry,  it 
charged  him  with  intriguing  with  the  federalists  to  defeat 
the  election  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  through  their  aid  place 
himself  in  the  presidential  chair.  James  Cheetham,  an 
Englishman  by  birth,  a  man  of  wit  and  great  talents  as  a 
periodical  writer,  but  as  a  political  writer  sometimes  too 
regardless  of  truth,  was  the  senior  editor  and  conductor 
of  this  paper. 

On  the  other  hand.  Col.  Burr  and  his  friends  established 
a  paper  in  New- York,  denominated  the  Morning  Chroni- 
cle, of  which  Dr.  Irving  was  the  editor,  which  was  the 
antagonist  of  the  American  Citizen.  Mr.  Irving,  who 
was  a  man  of  respectable  literary  attainments,  did  not 
seem  so  well  qualified  for  that  kind  of  cut  and  thrust  war- 
fare which  then  was,  and  now  is,  too  much  the  fashion  of 
the  day,  as  Mr.  Cheetham.  The  Morning  Chronicle, 
however,  carried  the  war  into  the  camp  of  the  opponents 
of  Mr.  Burr,  charging  the  Clintons  and  Livingstons  with 


186  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1S02. 

inordinate  personal  ambition,  with  exercising  an  unwar 
rantable  and  dictatorial  power  over  the  democratic  party, 
and  with  having  appropriated  an  unreasonable  por- 
tion of  the  spoils  of  victory  to  their  own  immediate  use. 
It  affirmed  that  the  conduct  of  Col.  Burr  had  been  cor- 
rect and  honorable,  and  that  the  opposition  to  him  was 
produced  by  a  desire  to  get  rid  of  him,  in  order  to  bring 
forward  some  member  of  the  Clinton  or  Livingston  fami- 
ly as  the  prominent  favorite  of  the  democracy  of  the 
north,  for  the  high  office  which  Burr  then  held,  and  ulti- 
mately for  the  first  office  in  the  nation.  The  controversy 
was  conducted,  as  I  have  remarked,  with  extreme  asperi- 
ty, and  the  leaders  of  the  two  sections  of  the  republicans 
became  personally  hostile  to  each  other;  so  much  so  that 
social  intercourse  was  broken  off  between  them,  and  even 
pecuniary  transactions  were  affected  and  controlled  by  their 
political  prejudices  and  animosities.  The  Manhattan 
Bank,  we  have  seen,  was  owned  and  controlled  by  the 
republicans  of  New-York,  and  the  power  of  that  institu- 
tion was  now  wielded  against  the  Burrites.  Col.  Burr 
and  his  warm  personal  and  political  friend.  Col,  John 
Swartwout,  were  turned  out  of  the  direction  of  that 
bank  after  a  sharply  contested  election.  Judge  Brock- 
hoist  Livingston  was  chosen  a  director  to  the  exclusion 
of  Mr.  Swartwout.  The  language  used  by  gentlemen  in 
speaking  of  each  other,  was  rude  and  offensive.  Mr.  De 
Witt  Clinton,  in  a  conversation  relating  to  Mr.  Swart- 
wout, called  him  a  "  a  liar,  a  scoundrel  and  a  villain^ 
And  here  I  may  remark,  that  one  defect  in  Mr.  Clinton's 
character  as  a  public  man,  and  indeed  as  a  private  citizen, 
was  that  he  was  too  reckless  in  his  remarks  about  gentle- 
men who  differed  with  him  in  political  opinions.  He  was 
too  apt  to  treat  and  speak  of  every  man  who  opposed 
his  political  views  as  dishonest,  or  wholly  incompetent 
to  judge  between  right  and  wrong.     It    is    singular  that 


1802.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  187 

his  long  experience  as  a  politician,  and  his  extensive  ac- 
quaintance with  men,  did  not  more  effectually  convince 
him  that  it  was  not  true  that  every  man  who  did  not  ac- 
cord with  him  in  sentiment  was  either  a  knave  or  a  fool. 
Mr.  Swartwout  was  a  generous  and  brave  man,  ardent 
in  his  friendships,  and  equally  heated  against  those  he 
chose  to  consider  as  his  enemies.  He  was  passionately  de- 
voted to  Col.  Burr,  but  like  most  of  Burr's  adherents,  too 
careless  about  the  means  used  for  the  accomplishment  of 
political  ends.  The  offensive  language  of  Mr.  Clinton  in 
respect  to  Col.  Swartwout,  which  I  have  quoted,  induced 
the  latter  gentleman  to  demand  through  his  friend  Col. 
Smith,  an  apology  or  recantation  from  Mr.  Clinton.  Mr. 
C.  replied  that  Swartwout  had  charged  him  with  opposing 
Col.  Burr  from  unworthy  and  selfish  motives,  that  he  had 
applied  the  epithets  to  Mr,  Swartwout  in  reference  to  that 
charge,  and  that  if  Swartwout  would  retract  his  charge, 
he  (Mr.  C.)  would  apologize  for,  or  take  back  the  offensive 
expressions.  This  Swartwout  refused  to  do.  A  duel  was 
the  consequence.  Five  shots  were  exchanged,  and  Mr. 
Swartwout  was  twice  wounded,  notwithstanding  which  he 
expressed  his  desire  to  continue  the  fight.  Mr.  Clinton 
declared  that  he  was  shooting  at  a  man  against  whom  he 
felt  no  personal  enmity,  and  the  surgeons  finally  interfered 
and  declared  that  the  situation  o£  Mr.  Swartwout  was 
such  as  rendered  it  improper  that  the  contest  should  be 
continued.* 

•  Mr.  John  C.  Hamilton,  in  the  second  volume  of  the  Biography  of  his  Father, 
p.  276,  after  speaking  of  a  pamphlet,  written  by  Gen.  Hamilton,  recommending 
mild  and  lenient  treatment  towards  the  tories  of  the  revolution,  and  of  the  effect 
that  pamphlet  had  on  the  public  mind  in  allaying  the  persecuting  spirit  which  ex 
isted  among  the  whigs  against  that  class  of  people  says,  "  that  the  pamphlet  and 
its  effects  excited  bitter  animosity  against  the  General  among  a  portion  of  the 
citizens  of  New- York;  and  he  states  that  "there  existed  at  this  lime  an  even 
ing  club,  composed  of  persons  conspicuous  in  the  prosecution  of  these  attain- 
ders," (of  diaaffected  persons,)  "  some  of  whom  had  written  in  opposition  to 
Phocion,  (the  signature  assumed  by  Gen.  Hamilton,)  and  who  felt  themselves  the 
deserved  objects  of  its  just  denunciation  \" 

"  Early  in  the  evening  of  this  meeting,  it  was  proposed  that  Hamilton  shonld 


188  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1802. 

About  this  time  Mr.  Cheetham  published  a  pamphlet 
entitled  ^^  A  view  of  the  political  conduct  of  Aaron  Burr^^ 
in  which  he  professed  to  give  a  history  of  his  political 
conduct,  from  the  time  of  his  first  entrance  into  public  life 
down  to  the  time  when  the  pamphlet  was  written.  It  was 
written  with  great  tact,  and  although  evidently  too  bold 
in  its  denunciations  and  too  reckless  in  assuming  charges 
proved  which  rested  upon  slight  circumstantial  evidence, 
there  seems,  in  my  judgment,  enough  contained  in  it  to 
lead  the  mind  fairly  to  the  conclusion  that  Col.  Burr  was 
a  trimmer  in  politics,  and  an  unsafe  man  to  be  entrusted 
with  an  important  office-  Shortly  afterwards  a  pamphlet 
appeared  to  which  the  fictitious  signature  of  Aristides  was 
affixed.  This  pamphlet  attacked  with  unprecedented  se- 
verity the  public  and  private  character  of  nearly  all  the 
distinguished  men  of  the  republican  party.  Doct.  Tillot- 
son  and  Judge  Livingston,  and  indeed  the  whole  Living- 
ston family,  were  assailed  with  great  bitterness.  Their 
motives  were  arraigned  and  impeached,  and  their  private 
character  for  honor  and  veracity  was  traduced  and  villified. 
The  writer  alleges  the  governing  maxim  of  the  Livingston 
family  to  be — 

"Rem,  facias  rem, 

Si  possis  recte,  si  noo,  quoque  rnodo,  rem." 

But  the  vials  of  his  wrath,  the  dregs  of  his  gall  and  bitter- 
ness, seem  to  have  been  reserved  to  be  poured  on  the 
heads  of  De  Witt  Clinton  and  Ambrose  Spencer.     He 

b«  chaUenged,  and  in  case  the  first  challenger  should  faU  that  others  should  chal- 
lenge him  in  succession,"  until  someone  should  take  his  life. 

This  barbarous  plot  was  defeated  by  the  opposition  of  Mr.  Ledyard,  who  was 
one  of  the  writers  whom  Hamilton  had  attacked,  who  came  in  in  time  to  break 
up  this  savage  combination. 

Suspicions  were  entertained  by  the  opponents  of  Col.  Burr,  that  some  such 
combination  had  been  formed  by  the  Burrites  in  relation  to  Mr.  Clinton  and  his 
leading  friends.  A  subsequent  challenge  and  duel  with  Richard  Riker  favored 
this  suspicion ;  but  no  man  who  is  acquainted  with  the  frank  and  open  hearted 
JohnSwartwout  can  for  one  moment  tolerate  the  idea  that  he  was  a  party  to 
such  a  combination. 


1802.]  or   NEW-YORK.  189 

charges  them  with  every  thing  vile,  every  thing  mean  and 
malignant.  William  P.  Van  Ness  is  now  the  admitted 
author  of  this  production.  It  is  written  with  great  talent. 
As  a  political  writer,  its  style  renders  Mr.  Van  Ness  un- 
rivalled since  the  days  of  Junius;  and  yet,  every  sentence 
and  line  of  it  seems  to  have  been  written  with  such  intense 
hate  and  malice  boiling  in  his  bosom,  that  no  man  who 
possesses  the  least  portion  of  the  milk  of  human  kindness 
would  consent  to  enjoy  the  reputation  for  genius  and  ta- 
lent, to  which  the  author  is  entitled,  if  the  possession  of 
that  reputation  must  of  necessity  be  connected  with  the 
evidence  which  this  pamphlet  affords  of  the  extreme  ma- 
lignity of  the  heart  of  the  writer. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  both  parties  to  this 
controversy,  in  their  speeches  and  writings,  did  injustice 
to  the  adverse  party,  and  it  would  be  unsafe  implicitly  to 
rely  even  on  the  statement  of  facts  by  either.  Honorable 
men,  under  high  party  excitement,  will  distort  and  disco- 
lor facts  in  their  statements,  so  that  it  will  be  often  diffi- 
cult for  a  disinterested  person  to  arrive  at  a  correct  conclu 
sion.  Lady  Betty  Germain  was  right  when  she  said,  "  1 
have  lived  long  enough  never  wholly  to  believe  any  side 
or  party  against  the  other."  There  were,  however,  a 
combination  of  facts  and  circumstances  connected  with  the 
last  presidential  election,  as  we  have  heretofore  seen, 
which  could  neither  be  denied  nor  satisfactorily  explained; 
and  which  rendered  it  impossible  for  candid  men  to  avoid 
coming  to  the  conclusion  that  Col.  Burr  had  not  conducted 
with  good  faith  towards  his  political  friends.  There  is 
no  vice  or  frailty  to  which  man  is  liable  which  excites 
more  abhorrence  in  a  generous  mind  than  treachery  towards 
friends.  We  can  forgive  an  open  enemy  who  has  injured 
us;  we  can  sometimes  admire  his  energy,  his  enterprise, 
and  his  spirit,  even  when  his  efforts  are  exerted  against 
ourselves,  but  we  cannot  avoid  despising  as  well  as  detest- 


190  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1803. 

ing  the  traitor.  But  the  republican  press,  out  of  the  city 
of  New-York,  for  a  long  time  declined  interfering  in  this 
controversy,  and  it  was  not  until  the  16th  of  November 
that  the  Albany  Register  came  out  openly  against  Mr. 
Burr.  The  editor  of  that  paper,  (Mr.  Barber,)  a  very 
upright  and  honest  man,  then  declared  that  he  had  for  a 
long  time  hesitated,  but  that  the  evidence  of  Col.  Burr's 
tergiversations  had  so  multiplied  upon  him  that  he  could 
no  longer  resist  the  conclusion  that  Mr.  B.  had  forfeited 
the  confidence  of  the  republican  party.  Nearly  all  the 
democratic  newspapers  followed  in  the  wake  of  the  Alba- 
ny Register. 

The  legislature  convened  on  the  24th  January,  1803. 
When  the  members  came  together  it  was  soon  ascertained 
that  an  immense  majority  of  the  republicans  disapproved 
of  the  conduct  of  Col.  Burr,  and  that  he  no  longer  pos- 
sessed their  confidence.  Thomas  Storm  was  re-elected 
speaker,  and  Solomon  Southwick  was  chosen  clerk  in 
opposition  to  Mr.  Van  Ingen,  a  federalist  who  had  long 
been  the  clerk  of  the  assembly.  The  vote  stood  forty- 
two  for  Southwick  and  thirty-one  for  Van  Ingen.  This, 
however,  was  not  a  true  criterion  of  the  strength  of  parties; 
for  shortly  afterwards  a  question  was  taken  in  the  house 
on  the  answer  to  the  governor's  speech,  when  it  appeared 
there  were  but  twenty  federalists  in  that  branch  of  the 
legislature;  at  any  rate  there  were  but  twenty  who  voted. 
Mr.  Southwick  was  the  brother-in-law  of  Mr.  Barber,  the 
proprietor  and  the  editor  of  the  Albany  Register,  and 
connected  with  him  in  the  printing  and  management  of 
that  paper.  Mr.  S.  was  then  a  young  man,  elegant  and 
prepossessing  in  his  personal  appearance,  of  ardent  feel- 
ings and  fascinating  manners.  He  was  a  most  zealous 
democrat.  His  intercourse  with  his  acquaintance  was 
frank  and  cordial.  He  was  warm  in  his  friendships,  and 
magnanimous  and  generous  to  his  enemies.     These  quali- 


1803.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  191 

ties  soon  procured  him  a  powerful  influence  with  the 
members  of  the  legislature,  and  the  republican  party  in 
general. 

It  became  necessary  during  this  session  to  elect  a  sena 
tor  of  the  United  States,  in    lieu  of  Governeur  Morris 
whose  term  of  service  expired  on  the  4th  of  March,  1803. 
The  prominent  republican  candidates  for  that  office  were 
Gen.  Theodorus  Bailey,  then  of  Dutchess  county,  and  Mr. 
John  Woodworth  of  Rensselaer  county,  afterwards  attor- 
ney general,  and  lately  a  judge  of  the  supreme  court. 
The  election  was  to  take  place  on  the  first  day  of  Feb- 
ruary; and  on  the  evening    preceding,  a  caucus  of  the 
republican  members  was  held,  at  which,  upon  a  ballot,  Mr. 
Bailey  had  thirty  votes  and  Mr.  Woodworth  forty-five, 
who,  of  course,  was  declared  duly  nominated.     Matthias 
B.  Talmadge,  a  senator  and  brother-in-law  to  Gen.  Bailey, 
was  dissatisfied  with  this  nomination,  and  set  himself  at 
work  to   defeat   the  election    of  Mr.  Woodworth.     He 
persuaded  several  of  the  democratic  senators,  chiefly  those 
coming  from  the  southern  part  of  the  state,  and  some  of  the 
members  of  assembly,  of  whom  Mr.  James  Burt  of  Orange 
county  was  the  most  active,  to  abandon  the  caucus  nomi- 
nation and  agree  to  vote  for  Gen.  Baileyj  but  a  sufficient 
number  of  members  of  assembly  could  not  be  dissuaded 
from  the  regular  usage  of  their  party  to  prevent  the  nomi- 
nation in  that  house  of  Mr.  Woodworth;  for  the  next  day, 
in  the  assembly,  Mr.  Bailey  had  nineteen  votes,  Mr.  Morris 
eighteen  and  Mr.  Woodworth  fifty-three,  and  he  was  of 
course  nominated.     In  the  senate,  where  the  federalists 
were  stronger  in  proportion  than  they  were  in  the  assem- 
bly, a  communication  was  opened  with  them,  and   Mr. 
Van  Vechten  got  up  a  federal  caucus  on  the  morning  of 
the  first  of  February,  and  before  the  hour  of  meeting  for 
the  senate  had  arrived,  at  which  it  was  agreed  ultimately 
to  support  Gen.  Bailey. 


192  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1803. 

When  the  senate  came  to  act  on  the  nomination  of  an 
United  States  senator  the  federalists  all  voted  for  Gover- 
neur  Morris,  and  a  few  of  the  republicans  voted  for  Mr. 
Bailey,  leaving  a  minority  vote  for  Woodworth.  A  reso- 
lution was  then  offered,  that  Mr.  Bailey  be  declared  nomi- 
nated on  the  part  of  the  senate,  and  carried  by  the  follow- 
ing vote: — Adriance,  Bruyn,  Chipman,  Foote,  Gordon, 
Hatfield,  Hathorn,  Hitchcock,  Hunting,  Kent,  L'Home- 
dievLjLawyer,  Suffern,Talmadge,Fan  Schoonhoven  andFan- 
Vechten.  Those  whose  names  are  in  italics  were  federal- 
ists. It  will  be  perceived  that  Mr.  Bailey  was  nominated 
by  the  aid  of  six  federal  votes.  When  the  two  houses  met 
to  compare  nominations,  Mr.  Talmadge  and  his  republican 
friends  of  the  senate,  and  Mr.  Burt  with  his  corps  of  nine- 
teen in  the  assembly,  voted  with  the  federalists  on  joint 
ballot,  and  the  result  was  Mr.  Woodworth  had  fifty-seven, 
and  Mr.  Bailey  fifty-nine  votes,  and  he  was  declared  duly 
elected. 

It  is  impossible  to  look  upon  this  transaction  without 
disapprobation.  I  speak  neither  of  the  merits  or  demerits 
of  Gen.  Bailey;  for  although,  he  was  one  of  the  members 
of  congress  in  1800,  whom  Col.  Burr  had  indicated  as  a 
person  who  would  eventually  vote  for  him  for  president; 
and  although  it  has  been  alleged  that  he  was  persuaded  to 
decline  the  performance  of  his  agreement  with  Burr,  under  a 
promise  of  office  from  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  that  the  New- 
York  post  oflSce  was  finally  given  to  him  in  fulfilment 
of  that  promise,  I  have  reason  to  believe  he  was  a  respect- 
able man — certainly  he  was  an  amiable  member  of  society. 
Yet  I  think  that  when  political  friends  consent  to  go  into 
caucus  for  the  nomination  of  oflScers,  every  member  of  such 
caucus  is  bound  in  honor  to  support  and  carry  into  effect 
its  determination.  If  you  suspect  that  that  determina- 
tion will  be  so  preposterous  that  you  cannot  in  conscience 
support  it,  then  you  ought  on  no  account  to  become  one 


1803.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  193 

of  its  members.  To  try  your  chance  in  a  caucus,  and 
then  because  your  wishes  are  not  gratified,  to  attempt  to 
defeat  the  result  of  the  deliberation  of  your  friends, 
strikes  me  as  a  palpable  violation  of  honor  and  good  faith. 
You  caucus  for  no  other  possible  purpose  than  under  the 
implied  agreement,  that  the  opinion  and  wishes  of  the 
minority  shall  be  yielded  to  the  opinions  of  the  majority 
and  the  sole  object  of  caucussing  is  to  ascertain  what 
is  the  will  of  the  majority.  I  repeat,  that  unless  you  in- 
tend to  carry  into  effect  the  wishes  of  the  majority,  how- 
ever contrary  to  your  own,  you  have  no  business  at  a 
caucus. 

During  this  session,  it  was  ascertained  that  the  treasurer, 
Mr.  McClanan,  had  become  a  defaulter  in  more  than 
thirty-three  thousand  dollars.  It  would  seem  from  Mr. 
C.'s  statement  which  I  have  barely  once  casually  and 
hastily  read,  that  he  was  in  arrears  with  his  creditors 
when  he  was  appointed;  and  that,  pressed  by  their  impor- 
tunities he  had  applied  some  of  the  funds  of  the  state  to 
satisfy  those  arrears.  There  was  a  sharp  contest  for  the 
office  of  treasurer  when  Mr.  McClanan  was  appointed, 
and  if  his  statement  be  correct,  is  it  not  probable  that 
some  of  his  creditors  may  have  urged  his  appointment  in 
the  hope  of  realizing  their  debts  rightly  if  they  could,  if 
not  rightly,  that  at  any  rate  they  would  realize  them? 

Upon  the  discovery  of  this  defalcation,  the  legislature 
appointed  Abraham  G.  Lansing,  brother  of  the  chancel- 
lor, a  man  of  wealth  and  high  character  for  integrity  and 
correct  business  habits,  treasurer.  They  also  by  the  same 
law  enacted  that  the  treasurer  should  keep  his  accounts  in 
banks  separate  from  his  private  accounts,  that  he  should 
forthwith  deposit  all  monies  he  should  receive  in  the 
Bank  of  Albany,  that  he  should  exhibit  his  bank  book 
once  a  month  to  the  comptroller,  who,  if  he  discovered 
any  errors    or  irregularities,   was  required  to  report  the 

13 


194  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1803. 

same  to  the  governor,  who  was  authorized  and  requirea 
immediately  by  proclamation  to  suspend  the  functions  of 
the  treasurer,  and  from  that  moment  the  duties  of  the 
treasurer  devolved  on  the  president  and  directors  of  the 
Bank  of  Albany.  This  act  was  passed  on  the  8th  day  of 
February. 

On  the  19th  of  March,  a  law  was  passed  chartering  the. 
New-York  State  Bank.  I  shall,  however,  in  pursuance 
of  what  I  have  before  intimated,  omit  any  account  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  legislature  on  this  subject  till  I  come 
to  the  year  1812,  when  the  Bank  of  America  was  incor- 
porated, other  than  to  remark,  that  a  new  and  very  excep- 
tionable ground  was  taken  by  the  petitioners  for  this 
charter,  in  support  of  their  application.  There  were  then 
but  three  banks  north  and  west  of  the  city  of  New-York 
These  were  the  Bank  of  Columbia  at  Hudson,  the  Farm- 
er's Bank  between  Lansingburgh  and  Troy,  and  the  Bank 
of  Albany  in  the  city  of  Albany.  It  was  said,  and  no 
doubt  said  truly,  that  the  stock  of  these  banks  was  prin- 
cipally owned  by  federalists.  A  large  majority  of  the 
petitioners  for  the  State  Bank,  claimed  to  be  republicans; 
they  therefore  asked  for  a  charter  upon  party  grounds,  as 
a  political  measure,  upon  the  assumed  principle,  that  the 
bank,  if  chartered,  was  to  be  a  republican  bank!  How 
supremely  absurd  was  this  pretence!  They  might  as  well 
have  talked  of  republican  wheat  or  corn,  of  republican 
air  and  water,  as  of  republican  money  or  a  republican 
bank. 

The  April  election  this  year,  resulted  in  the  complete 
triumph  of  the  democratic  party,  not  only  in  this  state  but 
in  almost  every  other  state  in  the  union.  Mr.  Jefferson 
was  a  southern  man,  and  local  feelings  and  personal  pre- 
dilections secured  him  the  unanimous  support  of  the  south. 
The  northern  and  middle  states  were  relieved  from  inter- 
nal taxes,  the  army  was  principally  disbanded,  the  odious 


1803.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  |96 

sedition  law  was  abolished,  and  all  men  could  speak  and 
write  what  they  pleased, — a  privilege  of  inestimable  value 
to  the  talking  and  scribbling  eastern  and  northern  people, — 
Mr.  Jay's  treaty  had  secured  a  peace  with  England,  and 
with  France  we  were  on  good  terms,  a  considerable  por- 
tion of  the  transportation  of  the  merchandize  of  Europe 
was  carried  on  by  American  vessels  almost  exclusively 
owned  by  citizens  of  the  eastern,  northen  and  middle 
states,  the  bread  stuffs  produced  in  those  states  were  in 
great  demand  in  Europe  to  feed  the  countless  legions  of 
soldiers  which  the  nations  of  the  old  world  then  had  in 
the  field,  wheat  was  at  the  enormous  price  of  from  two 
to  three  dollars  per  bushel,  national  and  bank  stocks 
were  steadily  rising  in  value,  and  the  great  revolutionary 
national  debt  was  in  a  rapid  progress  of  extinguishment^ 
under  such  circumstances  of  unprecedented  prosperity,  it  is 
not  at  all  surprising  that  the  people  should  have  been  con- 
tented and  happy,  and  should  have  clung  to  that  adminis- 
tration which  apparently  secured  to  them  such  high  ad- 
vantages over  any  other  nation  on  the  globe. 

John  Broome,  (afterwards  lieutenant  governor,)  was 
elected  senator  from  the  southern  district,  Robert  Johnson, 
Joshua  H.  Brett,  and  James  Burt  from  the  middle,  John 
Tayler,  John  Woodworth,  Edward  Savage,  Simon  Veeder, 
and  Thomas  Treadwell  from  the  eastern,  and  Caleb  Hyde 
from  the  western  district,  all  republicans.  The  aggre- 
gate vote  of  the  freeholders  of  the  state  gave  the  demo- 
cratic ticket  a  majority  of  eight  thousand  five  hundred 
and  eighty-eight.  In  the  assembly  eighty-three  republi- 
cans were  elected  and  but  seventeen  federalists. 

In  detailing  the  proceedings  of  the  legislature  during 
the  winter  of  1803,  I  have  omitted  to  mention  that  the 
assembly  chose  Ebenezer  Purdy  of  the  southern,  John  C. 
Hogeboom  of  the   middle,  Jacobus  Van  Schoonhoven  of 


196  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1803. 

the  eastern  and  Jacob  Snell  of  the  western  districts  mem- 
bers of  the  council  of  appointment. 

I  cannot  write  the  name  of  John  C.  Hogeboom  with 
out  recording  my  testimony  to  the  goodness  of  his  heart 
and  the  energy  and  vigor  of  his  intellectual  powers.  He 
was  a  native  of  Columbia  county,  where  he  died.  His 
education  had  been  limited,  but  he  was  one  of  na- 
ture's great  men,  possessing  a  sound  judgment  and  clear 
and  discriminating  mental  faculties.  Ardent  and  inde- 
fatigable in  advancing  the  interests  and  wishes  of  his 
friends;  he  was  courteous  and  liberal  towards  his  political 
opponents.  He  lived  esteemed  and  respected,  and  died 
bitterly  lamented  by  all,  and  especially  by  those  who  had 
the  happiness  of  knowing  him. 

No  important  appointments  were  made  by  the  council 
during  the  winter. 


1803.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  197 

CHAPTER    VIII. 

FROM  MAY,  1803,  TO  MAY,  1804. 

In  the  summer  of  1803,  Mr.  Edward  Livingston,  who  ; 
6ad  been  appointed  United  States  attorney  for  the  district 
of  New-Yorkj  resigned  the  office  of  mayor  of  that  city. 
The  mayor  at  that  time  possessed  much  more  power  and 
greater  patronage  than  at  present,  and  the  office,  both  on 
account  of  its  dignity  and  emoluments,  was  sought  for  by 
men  of  high  standing  and  character.  Morgan  Lewis  then, 
as  we  have  seen,  chief  justice  of  the  supreme  court,  was 
a  candidate,  as  also  De  Witt  Clinton,  at  that  time  a  sena- 
tor of  the  United  States,  The  office  was  not  filled  by  the 
council  for  a  considerable  period  after  it  had  been  vacated, 
and  even  Mr.  Edward  Livingston,  although^  he  had  re- 
signed it  as  incompatible  with  the  performance  of  his 
duties  as  United  States  attorney,  it  is  said  manifested  a 
desire  to  be  re-appointed;  but  Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  was 
appointed  the  successor  of  Mr.  Livingston.  The  accep- 
tance of  this  office  rendered  it  necessary  for  Mr.  Clinton 
to  vacate  his  seat  in  the  senate  of  the  United  States,  and 
accordingly  he  soon  after  resigned  that  station. 

The  political  prospects  of  Mr.  Clinton  were,  at  that 
time,  justly  considered  equal  if  not  superior  to  any  man 
of  his  age  in  the  state  of  New- York,  and  perhaps  it  may 
DC  added,  in  the  northern  states.  He  has  been  charged 
with  being  governed  by  a  vaulting  ambition,  and  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  from  the  commencement  of  his  public 
career,  his  aspirations  were  of  a  character  high  and  exalt- 
ed. So  lofty  was  his  aim  and  mark,  that  whoever  knew 
him  will  bear  me  out  in  the  remark,  that  it  was  always 
inconsonant  to  his  disposition  to  act  in  a  capacity  subordi- 


198  POLITICAL    HISTORY.  [1803. 

nate  to  any  man.  I  mention  these  traits  in  his  character 
for  the  purpose  of  justifying  me  in  alleging  that  it  is  more 
than  probable  that  at  this  time  he  entertained  views  of 
attaining  the  presidency  of  the  United  States.  If,  then, 
such  were  his  views,  and  he  was  at  this  period  actually 
aiming  at  that  high  object,  then,  I  affirm,  as  a  politician, 
seeking  by  fair  and  honorable  means  to  accomplish  this 
great  end,  he  was  guilty  of  an  error;  and  so  far  as  I  can 
perceive,  his  first  error  in  respect  to  his  own  political  for- 
tunes, in  resigning  his  seat  in  the  senate  of  the  United 
States.  He  should  not  have  left  the  service  of  the  nation; 
on  the  contrary  he  should,  if  in  his  power,  have  constantly 
kept  himself  before  the  American  people,  in  the  service  of 
the  United  States.  He  had,  during  the  short  period  he 
was  a  member  of  the  senate,  taken  an  active  part  in  the 
deliberations  and  discussions  of  the  senate,  and  had  acquit- 
ted himself  in  a  creditable  manner.  He  was  the  favorite 
son  of  New- York.  He  was  morally  certain  that  the  whole 
popularity  and  weight  of  character  of  his  venerable  uncle, 
then  governor  of  the  state,  would  be  thrown  into  the  scale 
in  his  favor;  and  if  at  any  time  he  should  desire  to  aban- 
don legislation,  the  influence  of  Gov.  Clinton  and  the 
whole  republican  party  of  the  state  was  surely  sufficient 
to  have  secured  him  a  seat  in  the  national  cabinet,  or  a 
foreign  embassy;  which,  as  I  have  before  remarked,  would 
have  kept  him  constantly  before  the  American  people. 
All  these  advantages  he  gave  up  in  order  to  come  back  to 
the  city  of  New-York,  thereby  becoming  a  party  in  the 
controversies  of  the  bar-room  politicians  of  that  city,  and 
to  the  petty  quarrels  in  the  city  and  state  of  New-York 
about  the  pitiful  offices  of  masters  in  chancery,  sheriffs, 
clerks,  county  judges  and  justices  of  the  peace.  True, 
he  might  have  the  momentary  pleasure  of  disposing  of 
those  appointments  and  enjoying  the  flattery  which  those 
small  and  successful  office-seekers  might  lavish  upon  him; 


1803.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  199 

but  did  it  not  occur  to  him  that  the  unsuccesful  candidates 
for  office  would  be  more  numerous  than  the  successful 
ones,  and  that  the  disappointed  would  remember  the  injury 
they  imagined  done  to  them,  longer  than  the  appointed 
would  the  favor  conferred  on  them,  by  the  person  who 
procured  their  appointment  1  Mr.  Clinton  lived  long 
enough  to  be  convinced  by  sad  and  bitter  experience  that 
such  was  in  fact  the  nature  of  man.  It  may  be  urged  that 
his  pecuniary  circumstances  required  the  perquisites  of  the 
mayoralty;  but  such  was  not  the  fact.  Although  Mr.  C. 
received  very  little  from  his  father,  he  hart  lately  married 
the  daughter  of  Walter  Franklin,  a  wealthy  member  of 
the  society  of  friends  in  New-York,  by  whom  he  received 
a  fortune  of  about  forty  thousand  dollars  in  cash,  or  in 
good  investments.  Mr.  Clinton  did  not  improvidently 
expend  money  in  an  extravagant  style  of  living.  A 
judicious  investment  of  the  fortune  he  received  from  his 
wife  would,  together  with  what  he  would  have  received 
for  his  services,  even  had  he  continued  in  the  employment 
of  the  national  government,  have  afforded  a  sufficient 
income  to  have  enabled  him  to  have  lived  decently  without 
impairing  his  capital.  In  the  end,  his  return  to  New- 
York  had  a  disastrous  effect  on  his  pecuniary  concerns. 
Young  and  enterprising  business  men  without  capital,  but 
anxious  to  engage  in  business,  who  were  vigorous  and 
energetic  supporters  of  the  democratic  party,  looked  to  Mr. 
Clinton  to  aid  them  with  credit  or  cash,  and  enable  them 
to  commence  business.  Mr.  Clinton  was,  at  that  time,  a 
director  in  the  Manhattan  Bank,  and  paper  which  he 
endorsed  and  recommended  was  sure  to  be  discounted. 
Anxious  to  patronise  young  men,  and  liberal  to  a  fault, 
Mr.  Clinton  lent  his  influence  and  name  to  all  republican 
young  men  in  whose  capacity  he  had  confidence,  and 
whose  habits  he  supposed  to  be  good.  There  were  many 
failures;  some  chargeable  to  the  misfortunes  incident  to 


200  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1803. 

commercial  life,  and  some  to  misconduct  and  downright 
knavery.  To  discharge  the  liabilities  thus  incurred,  Mr. 
Clinton  was  obliged  to  create  large  debts,  which  embar- 
rassed and  harrassed  him  during  his  life.  Among  the 
imperfections  incident  to  humanity  is  one,  which  however 
odious,  always  has  existed  and  always  will  exist.  It  is 
this: — When  your  neighbor  has  conferred  on  you  an  obli- 
gation which  you  find  it  impossible  to  repay,  it  weighs 
heavy  on  your  mind;  but  if  a  man  quarrels  with  his  bene- 
factor and  declares  him  to  be  his  enemy,  then  the  vitiated 
and  distorted  mind  of  the  ingrate  feels,  or  affects  to  feel, 
that  all  previous  obligations  between  him  and  his  friend 
are  cancelled;  and  he  fancies  that  the  public  no  longer 
expects  that  he  shall  do  acts  of  kindness  to  one  whom  he 
has  declared  his  enemy.  Hence  cold  and  calculating 
knaves  will  frequently  seek  a  quarrel  with  the  man  who 
has  done  them  a  kindness  which  they  cannot  or  do  not 
wish  to  reciprocate,  for  the  sole  purpose  of  absolving 
themselves,  in  their  own  opinion,  from  the  obligation  of 
repaying  past  favors. 

This  detestable  propensity  in  our  nature,  was  afterwards 
fully  developed  towards  Mr.  Clinton;  and  in  the  progress 
of  our  enquiries  we  shall  see  nearly  the  whole  host  of 
disappointed  office-seekers  and  bankrupt  makers  of  notes 
which  he  had  as  endorser  been  compelled  to  pay,  united 
in  a  most  vindictive  and  exterminating  political  war 
against  him. 

In  any  aspect  therefore,  in  which  the  question  of  the 
policy  of  the  withdrawal  of  Mr.  Clinton  from  the  political 
theatre  of  Washington  can  be  viewed,  his  decision  was 
indiscreet  and  unwise. 

Gen.  Bailey  had  scarcely  taken  his  seat  in  the  United 
States  senate  when  he  was  appointed  post-master  at  the  city 
of  New-York.  He  therefore  resigned  the  office  of  senator, 
and  the  state  was  now  wholly  unrepresented  in  one  branch 


1803.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  201 

of  the  national  legislature.  Early  in  the  year  1804,  Jacob 
RadclifF  resigned  his  office  as  judge  of  the  supreme  court. 
I  am  ignorant  of  his  reasons  for  resigning,  but  from  his 
subsequent  conduct  it  is  very  evident  that  if  he  was  dis- 
gusted with  the  occupation  of  a  public  station  at  that 
time,  his  taste  for  political  life  revived  with  great  intense- 
ness  not  long  afterwards.  On  the  3d  of  February,  Am- 
brose Spencer,  then  attorney  general,  was  elevated  to  the 
bench  of  the  supreme  court,  to  supply  the  vacancy  occa- 
sioned by  Judge  Radclifl's  resignation,  and  John  Wood- 
worth  was  appointed  attorney  general. 

All  parties,  and  especially  the  members  of  the  bar, 
highly  venerated  the  talents  and  felt  the  most  profound 
respect  for  the  legal  learning  and  capacity  of  Judge 
Spencer,  but  the  federalists  were  alarmed  lest  his  political 
principles  and  partizan  feelings  should  influence  and  bias  his 
judicial  conduct.  In  this  they  were  happily  disappointed. 
He  discharged  his  official  duties  not  only  with  great  ability 
but  with  undoubted  integrity  and  rigid  impartiality.  I  may 
as  well  say  in  this  place  as  any  where,  that  although  Judge 
Spencer  from  the  commencement  of  his  professional  and 
political  life,  has  at  all  periods  of  it,  been  an  ardent  and  it 
may  be  added,  at  sometimes  a  violent  partizan,  and  his 
conduct  as  such,  may  at  times,  have  justly  excited  animad- 
version; yet  as  a  judge  he  was  always  able,  always  inde- 
pendent, always  impartial  and  always  honest. 

It  is  a  somewhat  singular  coincidence  that  William  W. 
Van  Ness,  then  a  young  lawyer,  and  a  zealous  federalist 
of  Columbia  county,  afterwards  a  judge  of  the  supreme 
court,  was  removed  from  the  office  of  surrogate  of  the 
county  of  Columbia,  for  political  reasons,  by  the  same 
council  at  the  same  time  that  Mr.  Spencer  was  appointed 
a  judge.  Did  either  one  or  the  other  anticipate  what 
would  be  their  official,  social  and  political  relations  for 
several  years  succeeding  the  year  1818]     Politicians  like 


202  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1804. 

all  other  men  are  blind  to  the  future,  and  it  is   perhaps 
"well  that  they  are  so. 

The  legislature  met  on  the  31st  day  of  January.  Al 
exander  Sheldon  of  Montgomery  county,  was  chosen 
speaker,  and  Mr.  Southwick  was  re-elected  clerk.  As 
usual  the  governor's  speech  was  short,  but  replete  with 
good  sense.  Among  other  things,  he  announced  to  them 
the  recent  amendment  of  the  United  States  constitution, 
requiring  the  presidential  electors  to  designate  the  candi- 
dates voted  for,  for  president  and  vice-president.  He  also 
reminded  the  legislature  that  two  senators  of  the  United 
States  were  to  be  chosen.  The  two  houses  immediately 
proceeded  to  the  choice  of  senators,  and  on  the  2d  Febru- 
ary, John  Armstrong  and  John  Smith  were  elected  with- 
out much  opposition. 

On  the  16th  February,  the  assembly  chose  a  council  of 
appointment,  consisting  of  John  Broome  from  the  south- 
ern, Abraham  Adriance  from  the  middle,  Thomas  Tread- 
well  from  the  eastern,  and  Caleb  Hyde  from  the  western 
districts. 

At  Washington,  as  well  as  in  the  state  of  New-York, 
all  political  confidence  was  withdrawn  from  Col.  Burr,  by 
an  immense  majority  of  the  republican  party,  and  his 
friends  did  not  even  attempt  to  procure  his  nomination 
for  vice  president  at  the  approaching  presidential  elec- 
tion. The  democratic  party  in  the  nation,  with  great 
unanimity  turned  their  attention  to  Gov.  Clinton,  and  he 
was  nominated  without  opposition  from  any  quarter. 
The  acceptance  of  that  nomination  by  Gov.  C.  rendered  it 
necessary  to  select  some  other  person  as  the  republican 
candidate  for  governor  of  the  state  of  New-York,  and 
men  began  to  cast  about  for  a  suitable  person  to  be  sup 
ported  for  that  office. 

In  the  mean  time  Mr.  Burr  and  his  friends  were  not  in- 
active.    The  last  annual  election  had  exhibited  so  large  a 


1801.]  OF   NEw-roRK.  203 

democratic  majority  in  the  state  that  the  federalists  had 
not  the  least  hope  of  success  in  the  election  of  a  go- 
vernor, if  they  should  attempt  to  support  a  candidate  from 
their  own  party.  Under  these  circumstances  the  Burrites 
concluded  to  bring  out  their  chief  in  opposition  to  the 
regular  republican  candidate,  whoever  he  might  be,— in 
the  confident  expectation  that  the  federalists  would  gene- 
rally cast  their  votes  for  him.  I  have  before  remarked 
that  this  kind  of  political  manoeuvering  is  generally  weak 
and  in  most  cases  terminates  in  the  prostration  and  ruin 
of  the  actors  in  the  drama.  Col.  Burr's  prospects,  how- 
ever, seemed  to  assume  an  imposing  aspect.  His  repub- 
lican friends  in  the  city  of  New-York,  though  not  nume- 
rous, were  talented,  industrious,  active  and  indefatigable 
in  their  exertions;  and  in  almost  all  the  counties  in  the 
state  some  distinguished  republicans  declared  themselves 
in  his  favor.  In  Dutchess  and  Orange  counties  he  had 
considerable  strength  among  the  republicans.  In  Orange 
he  had  heretofore  been  a  favorite,  having  been  elected 
once  a  member  of  assembly,  and  afterwards  a  delegate  to 
the  convention  by  the  republicans  of  that  county,  although 
he  resided  in  the  city  of  New-York.  Jonathan  Fisk, 
George  Gardner,  David  M.  Wescott  and  Peter  Townsend, 
efficient  and  influential  democrats  of  that  county,  were 
his  zealous  and  active  friends.  Mr.  Burt  of  the  senate 
was  said  to  be  inclined  also  to  support  Col.  Burr.  Gen. 
Erastus  Root  of  Delaware,  the  bold  and  decided  republi- 
can of  1798,  and  a  member  of  congress,  was  his  avowed 
friend.  John  Van  Ness  Yates  of  Albany,  son  of  the  late 
chief  justice,  came  out  in  his  favor.  At  the  west,  Judge 
Annin  of  the  senate,  and  Oliver  Phelps  the  great  eastern 
land  speculator,  then  living  in  Ontario  county,  announced 
themselves  the  friends  of  Col.  Burr,  and  Peter  B.  Porter, 
then  a  young  man  and  clerk  of  Ontario  county,  was  also 
a  Burrite. 


204  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1804. 

The  friends  of  Col.  Burr  in  the  legislature,  first  broke 
ground.  A  meeting  was  held  at  the  Tontine  Coffee 
House  in  Albany,  on  the  18th  of  February,  of  which 
William  Tabor,  a  member  of  assembly  from  Dutchess 
county,  was  chairman,  and  Joseph  Annin  of  the  senate 
was  secretary*  at  which  Col.  Burr  was  nominated  for 
governor.  I  have  been  unable  to  ascertain  how  many 
members  of  the  legislature  were  in  attendance  and  took 
part  in  the  meeting.  Their  numbers,  however,  must  have 
been  very  small.  This  nomination  was  reiterated  at  a 
meeting  held  in  New- York  on  the  20th  of  February,  of 
which  Col.  Marinus  Willet  was  chairman,  and  Ezekiel 
Robins,  secretary.  Shortly  afterwards,  at  a  meeting  of 
citizens  in  Albany,  the  nomination  of  Burr  for  governor 
was  concurred  in,  and  Oliver  Phelps  of  Ontario  coun- 
ty, was  nominated  for  lieutenant  governor. 

Previous  to  the  nomination  of  Col.  Burr,  a  legislative 
caucus  of  republican  members  was  held  in  the  assembly 
chamber,  of  which  Ebenezer  Purdy  was  chairman,  and  S. 
Southwick,  secretary,  when  Chancellor  Lansing  was  no- 
minated for  governor,  and  John  Broome  for  lieutenant 
governor.  The  chancellor  in  the  first  instance  accepted 
the  nomination,  but  on  the  18th  day  of  February  he  ad- 
dressed a  letter  to  Mr,  Purdy,  the  chairman,  in  which  he 
stated,  that  he  had  reluctantly  accepted  the  nomination,  be- 
cause it  was  represented  to  him  that  his  acceptance  would 
afford  a  point  of  union  calculated  to  promote  and  procure 
the  ascendancy  of  republican  principles,  but  said  he 
"  subsequent  events  have  induced  me  to  believe  that  my 
hopes  on  this  subject  were  too  sanguine."  He  therefore 
declined  to  stand  a  candidate.  What  those  "  subsequent 
events''^  were  to  which  the  chancellor  alluded,!  shall  have 
occasion  to  explain  hereafter.  On  the  20th  of  February, 
another  republican  caucus  was  held,  at  which  Mr.  Purdy 
again  presided.     At  this  meeting,  Morgan   Lewis   was 


1804.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  206 

nominated  for  governor,  and  Mr.  Broome  was  again  nomi- 
nated for  lieutenant  governor.  It  would  seem  that  the 
nomination  of  Chief  Justice  Lewis  was  made  with  some 
reluctance.  At  any  rate  he  was  evidently  not  the  first 
choice  of  the  party.  Probably  some  jealousy  was  then  en- 
tertained of  the  influence  and  power  of  the  Livingston  fami- 
ly. Others  it  is  said,  doubted  his  fitness  and  capacity  for  the 
proper  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  chief  executive  of  the 
state.  The  declension  however,  of  Chancellor  Lansing, 
was  a  complete  surprise  to  the  party,  and  no  other  person 
on  that  emergency  could  be  fixed  upon.  Mr.  Clinton  was 
quite  young,  and  no  doubt  the  Livingstons,  and  perhaps 
some  others,  began  to  entertain  some  jealousy  of  his 
rapidly  increasing  influence  and  power.  Judge  Spencer 
had  so  recently  been  a  decided  and  active  federalist,  that 
it  was  doubtful  whether  all  the  republican  freeholders 
could  be  induced  to  vote  for  him.  The  time  for  delibera 
tion  was  necessarily  short.  In  this  state  of  things  Mr. 
Lewis  was  selected,  and  his  political  friends  three  years 
afterwards  alledged  that  "  his  nomination  was  caused  by 
fortuitous  circumstances."  An  address,  however,  was 
drawn  up  in  favor  of  his  election,  and  signed  by  one 
hundred  and  four  members.  This  was  certainly  evidence 
of  great  unanimity,  as  that  number  included  all  the  mem- 
bers of  both  houses  save  twenty-eight  only.  It  will, 
therefore,  be  seen  that,  including  federalists  as  well  as 
Burrites,  their  whole  number  amounted  to  no  more  than 
twenty-eight  out  of  one  hundred  and  thirty-two. 

At  the  February  term  of  the  supreme  court,  a  cause  was 
argued  which  highly  excited  the  attention  of  the  New- 
York  public,  as  well  from  the  importance  of  the  question 
disputed,  as  the  eminent  standing  and  transcendent  ability 
of  the  council  who  took  part  in  the  argument. 

Harry  Croswell,  the  printer  and  editor  of  a  leading  fed- 
eral paper  called  The  Ballance,  published  at  Hudson,  had 


206  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1804. 

attacked  Mr.  Jefferson  with  great  severity.  The  grand 
jury  of  the  county  of  Columbia  indicted  him  for  a  libel 
The  cause  was  tried  by  Spencer,  attorney  general,  on  the 
part  of  the  people,  before  chief  justice  Lewis.  On  the 
trial  Mr.  Croswell  offered  to  prove  the  trufh  of  the  charges 
contained  in  the  libel  set  out  in  the  indictment;  and  the 
court,  in  accordance  with  the  English  common  law  doc- 
trine, rejected  the  evidence.  The  court  further  instructed 
the  jury  that  the  only  question  for  them  to  decide,  was  the 
fact  whether  the  alleged  libel  had  been  published  by  the 
defendant,  and  that  the  question  of  libel  or  no  libel  was  to 
be  determined  exclusively  by  the  court.  A  motion  was 
made  for  a  new  trial,  and  was  argued  on  the  part  of  Mr. 
Croswell  by  Wm.  W.  Van  Ness,  Harrison  and  Hamilton. 
Gen.  Hamilton,  on  this  occasion,  it  is  said,  excelled  all  his 
former  efforts.  He  took  a  wide  and  entended  range,  and 
shewed  that  the  maxim  "  the  greater  the  truth  the  greater 
the  libel,"  was  of  modern  date  in  England:  that  it  was  at 
war  with  the  genius  of  all  our  civil  institutions,  and  mani- 
festly a  palpable  outrage  on  human  rights,  common  justice 
and  even  common  sense.  The  effect  of  his  eloquence  is 
still  remembered  with  enthusiasm  by  those  who  had  the 
good  fortune  to  hear  him.  Alas,  that  it  was  destined  to  be 
the  last  effort,  at  the  seat  of  government  of  this  state,  of 
that  wonderful  man.*  The  court,  however,  did  not  feel 
at  liberty  to  depart  from  what  they  deemed  the  fixed  and 
settled  rule  of  common  law;  but  the  views  presented  by 
Gen.  Hamilton  and   his  associate  council,  made  such  a 


*  A  correspondent  of  the  Evening  Post,  writing  from  Albany,  after  giving  an 
account  of  the  speeches  of  Gaines  and  Spencer  for  the  prosecution,  and  Wm.W.Van 
Ness  and  Harrison  for  the  defendant,  says  : — "After  all  came  the  great,  the  pow- 
erful Hamilton.  No  language  can  convey  an  adequate  idea  of  the  astonishing 
powers  evinced  by  him.  The  audience  was  numerous,  and  although  composed 
of  those  not  "  used  to  the  melting  mood,"  the  effect  produced  on  them  was  elec- 
tric. *  *  *  As  a  correct  argument  for  a  lawyer  it  was  very  imposing,  as  a  pro- 
found commentary  upon  the  science  and  practice  of  government  it  has  never  been 
Bitrpassed." 


1S04.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  207 

strong  impression  on  the  public  mind,  that  a  movement 
was  soon  after  made  in  the  legislature  to  pass  a  law  au- 
thorising the  truth  to  be  given  in  evidence,  where  the 
matter  written  or  printed  was  published  from  good  and 
justifiable  motives,  and  constituting  the  jury  in  this,  as  in 
all  other  criminal  cases,  judges  of  the  law  as  well  as  the 
fact. 

A  bill  for  this  purpose  was  immediately  brought  into 
the  assembly  by  Mr.  James  Emmott,  a  federal  member 
from  the  county  of  Dutchess.  By  the  terms  of  this  bill, 
as  drawn  by  Mr.  Emmott,  the  law  proposed  was  made 
declaratory.  This  phraseology  was  opposed,  as  implying 
that  such  was  then  the  common  law,  and  as  containing  a 
covert  censure  on  the  court  which  had  decided  the  case 
of  Croswell.  Other  questions  arose  in  proceeding  on  the 
bill,  relative  to  its  details,  and  in  consequence  of  those 
disagreements  the  law  of  libels  was  not  changed  during 
that  session;  but  in  the  following  session,  in  1805,  the 
subject  was  again  brought  before  the  legislature,  and  an 
act  was  passed  in  conformity  to  the  principles  of  the  bill 
introduced  by  Mr.  Emmott,  not,  however,  including  the 
word  "  declared.'''^  Thus  the  law  of  libels  was  placed  on 
a  true  and  correct  foundation,  perfectly  consistent  with 
the  liberty  of  the  press  and  the  protection  of  the  good 
name  and  reputation  of  every  individual  citizen.  The 
principles  of  this  statute  were  incorporated  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  1821.  But  it  is  time  to  return  to  the  electioneer- 
ing contest. 

Had  I  observed  accurately  the  order  of  time,  I  ought 
to  have  mentioned  that,  after  the  nomination  of  Chancellor 
Lansing,  and  before  he  finally  declined,  and  while  Gen. 
Hamilton  was  in  Albany,  a  consultation  or  caucus  was 
held  by  the  leading  federalists  at  Lewis's  city  tavern,  for 
the  purpose  of  comparing  opinions  on  the  question  Avhether 
the  federalists,  as  a  party,  ought  to  support  Col.  Burr 


208  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1804. 

They  intended  that  their  deliberations  should  be  secret 
and  confidential;  but  one  or  two  Burrites  were  concealed 
in  a  bed  room  adjoining  the  dining  room  where  the  fede- 
ralists were  assembled,  and  heard  and  reported  what 
passed  in  that  assemblage.  A  correspondent  of  the 
Morning  Chronicle,  under  date  of  the  17th  of  February, 
writes,  that  "  last  night  the  leading  federal  gentlemen  in 
this  place  had  a  meeting  at  the  city  tavern.  Gen.  Hamil- 
ton addressed  the  meeting  with  his  usual  eloquence,  and 
pointed  out  the  expediency  of  the  federal  party's  voting 
for  Chancellor  Lansing,  in  case  they  had  no  candidate  of 
their  own.  The  principal  part  of  his  speech  went  to 
show  that  no  reliance  ought  to  be  placed  on  Mr.  Burr." 
Notwithstanding  this  opposition  the  great  body  of  the 
federalists  manifested  a  determination  to  cast  their  votes 
for  Burrj  and  Gaylord  Griswold,  then  a  member  of  con- 
gress from  Herkimer  county,  wrote  a  letter  which  was 
published,  in  which  he  urged  his  friends  to  support  Mr. 
Burr  as  the  only  means  of  breaking  down  the  democratic 
party,  and  charged  the  opposition  of  Gen.  Hamilton  to 
"  personal  resentment  towards  Burr."  This  letter  bore 
date  the  27th  of  February. 

The  contest  terminated  in  the  election  of  Judge  Lewis 
by  a  large  majority;  I  believe  about  eight  thousand. 

Mr.  Burr  undoubtedly  received  a  very  considerable 
number  of  republican  votes;  ne  must  have  failed  in  conse- 
quence of  the  defection  of  a  portion  of  the  federal  party. 
No  doubt  many  federalists  entertained  an  honest  opinion 
similar  to  that  expressed  by  Gen.  Hamilton,  that  Mr.  Burr 
was  an  unprincipled  man,  and  that  no  reliance  could  be 
placed  on  him.  They,  therefore,  could  not  reconcile  it 
to  their  consciences  to  yield  their  aid  to  his  support  for 
the  first  and  most  important  office  in  the  state.  It  is  how- 
ever probable  that  a  larger  portion  of  that  party  had  be- 
come convinced  that  the  federalists,  as  a  party,  had  no 


1804.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  209 

prospect  of  gaining  a  permanent  ascendancy  in  the  staie, 
and  especially  in  the  nation;  that,  even  if  Burr  should  be 
successful  at  that  election,  his  triumph  would  be  momen- 
tary, and  they  therefore  seized  the  occasion  of  abandoning 
a  broken  down,  and  as  they  deemed,  a  ruined  party.  The 
result  of  the  canvass  showed,  on  a  comparison  with  the 
senatorial  election  of  1803,  that  the  republican  partv  had 
gained  as  many  recruits  from  the  federal  ranks  as  they 
had  lost  by  the  desertion  of  their  own  friends  who  voted 
for  Mr.  Burr;  and  this  will  generally  be  found  to  be  the 
consequence  resulting  from  this  weak  and  puerile  policy. 

The  result  of  the  election  for  members  of  the  legislature 
was  also  favorable  to  the  regular  republican  party.  In 
the  assembly  that  party  had  a  large  majority.  The  sena- 
tors elected  this  year  were  Ebenezer  Purdy  and  Thomas 
Thomas  from  the  southern;  Samuel  Brewster  and  Stephen 
Hogeboom  from  the  middle;  Stephen  Thomas  from  the 
eastern,  and  Jedediah  Peck  and  Henry  Huntington  from 
the  western  districts;  all  understood  to  belong  to  the  same 
party  who  supported  Mr.  Lewis. 

Daniel  D.  Tompkins  was  at  this  election  chosen  a 
member  of  congress  from  the  city  of  New-York. 

14 


2J0  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1804 

CHAPTER   IX. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1S04,  TO  MAY  1,  1805. 

The  result  of  the  New-York  election  had  entirely  pros- 
trated the  political  prospects  of  Col.  Burr.  He  was  irre- 
vocably cast  off  from  the  republican  party  in  the  nation; 
and  the  event  of  the  contest  in  this  state  had  proved  that 
his  friends  were  not  sufficiently  numerous  when  connected 
with  the  federalists,  or  so  many  of  them  as  would 
join  his  standard,  to  sustain  him  here.  Should  the 
federalists  as  a  party  ever  gain  the  ascendency,  the  pros- 
pect of  which  was  extremely  unpromising,  he  knew  by 
what  had  recently  occurred,  that  he  would  have  no  hopes 
of  promotion  from  that  party.  His  political  fortunes 
therefore  seemed  totally  wrecked  and  irretrievably  ruin- 
ed. In  reflecting  upon  the  cause  of  that  ruin,  he  un- 
doubtedly regarded  Gen.  Hamilton  as  the  principal  agent 
in  effecting  it.  If  at  any  time  he  had  expected  the  aid 
of  the  federal  members  of  congress  to  elect  him  president 
in  preference  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  he  had  there  met  the  oppo- 
sition of  Mr.  Hamilton;  for  on  that  occasion  Mr.  Bay- 
ard of  Delaware,  and  Mr.  Morris  of  Vermont,  two  of  Mr. 
H.'s  friends,  had  given  the  election  to  Mr.  Jefferson.  In 
the  late  contest,  when  his  political  life  was  at  stake,  the 
same  opponent  had  there  stood  in  his  way;  and  to  his  de- 
nunciation and  great  and  commanding  influence,  Mr.  Burr 
charged  the  defection  and  desertion  of  so  large  a  portion 
of  federalists  from  their  party.  These  considerations  must 
have  produced  in  the  gloomy  and  despairing  mind  of  Col. 
Burr  a  settled  determination  that  he  would  have  revenge 
— ^a  revenge  that  nothing  short  of  the  life  of  Hamilton 
would  satiate.     It  is  impossible  for  me  to  account  for  the 


1804.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  211 

duel  which  took  place  after  this  election,  hetween  Burr  and 
Hamilton,  upon  any  other  principle.  It  is  true,  that  had 
the  answer  of  Gen.  Hamilton  to  the  first  communication 
of  Burr  been  more  guarded  and  more  conciliatory  in  its 
tone  and  manner,  it  might  have  put  Burr  more  clearly  in 
the  wrong,  and  furnished  positive  and  decisive  evidence 
that  from  the  commencement  he  premeditated  and  deter- 
mined on  a  mortal  contest.  But  he  knew  that  Gen.  Ham- 
ilton from  his  youth,  had  been  a  military  man,  and  that  he 
was  sensitively  alive  to  his  honor  as  a  soldier;  and  a  care- 
ful review  of  the  correspondence  as  it  was  actually  con 
ducted,  will  convince  all  candid  men  that  Burr,  when  he 
wrote  the  first  note,  was  resolved  that  the  issue  should  be 
nothing  less  than  the  death  of  one  of  the  parties. 

The  ground  on  which  Col.  Burr  founded  his  cause  of 
offence  was  purely  technical.  Doct.  Charles  D.  Cooper, 
who  lived  in  the  family  of  Judge  Tayler  of  Albany,  and 
married  his  adopted  daughter,  was  warmly  and  actively 
engaged  as  a  partisan,  in  the  electioneering  campaign  be  • 
tween  Burr  and  Lewis. 

While  Hamilton  was  attending  the  supreme  court 
in  the  preceding  February  term,  he  had  dined  at  Judge 
Tayler'sj  and  in  conversation  on  that  occasion,  had  ex- 
pressed himself  against  the  election  of  Col.  Burr  as  go- 
vernor. He  spoke  of  Col.  Burr's  political  conduct  and 
principles  only,  to  which,  on  that,  as  on  all  other  occa- 
sions, he  declared  himself  hostile.  Doct.  Cooper  believ- 
ing that  the  opinions  of  Gen.  Hamilton  might  have  an 
effect  favorable  to  the  election  of  Mr.  Lewis,  wrote  an 
electioneering  letter  to  Mr.  Brown,  who  lived  in  one  of  the 
country  towns  of  the  county  of  Albany.  I  suppose  in 
the  haste  with  which  such  letters  are  commonly  writ- 
ten, he  stated  that  Gen.  Hamilton  was  openly  and 
decidedly  opposed  to  Burr,  and  that  Judge  Kent  and 
the  Patroon  were  indifferent  and  cold  towards  him.     This 


212  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1804. 

statement  was  in  part  contradicted  by  a  letter  written  by 
Gen.  Schuyler  to  Doct.  Stringer,  chairman  of  the  federal 
committee,  in  which  Gen.  S.  stated  that  Mr.  Hamilton  and 
Judge  Kent  had  not  stated  that  they  were  against  Burr  on 
the  question  as  between  him  and  Lewis;  but  merely  that 
they  preferred  Chancellor  Lansing  to  Col.  Burr.  On  the 
23d  of  April,  Doct.  Cooper  replied  to  Gen.  Schuyler's 
letter,  and  reiterated  the  assertions  contained  in  his  letter 
to  Brown.  He  affirms  that  Hamilton  and  Kent  both  con- 
sidered Burr  "  as  a  dangerous  man,  who  ought  not  to  be 
trusted  with  the  reins  of  government,"  and  then  adds  that 
he  "  could  detail  a  still  more  despicable  opinion,"  which 
Hamilton  had  expressed  of  Burr.  Now  it  is  well  known 
to  those  acquainted  with  the  manner  in  which  political 
letters  are  written  near  the  morning  of  an  excited  elec- 
tion, that  the  writers  of  those  letters  are  not  very  particu- 
lar in  the  choice  of  words  to  convey  their  ideas.  The 
meaning  of  Doct.  Cooper  undoubtedly  was,  "  Hamilton 
and  Kent  both  consider  Burr,  politically,  as  a  dangerous 
man  and  unfit  for  the  office  of  governor,  and  Hamilton 
has  expressed  his  opposition  to  Burr's  election  in  terms 
still  more  decided."  This  every  man  who  read  Cooper's 
letter  understood  to  be  his  real  meaning,  and  in  this  way 
Col.  Burr  must  have  understood  it.  He  chose,  however, 
to  fasten  on  the  word  "  despicable j"*^  and  consider  that,  as 
perhaps  it  technically  was,  offensive.  In  his  first  note  to 
Gen.  Hamilton,  he  without  preface  demands  of  him  "  a 
prompt  and  unqualified  acknowledgment  or  denial  of 
having  said  any  thing  which  warranted  such  an  expres- 
sion." This  note  bore  date  the  l8th  July.  On  the  20th 
Gen.  Hamilton  replied,  declining  an  express  admission  or 
denial,  alleging  that  the  charge  was  too  vague  and  inde- 
finite; and  denying  the  right  of  Col.  Burr  to  interrogate 
him  as  to  what  he  had  said;  but  declaring  his  readiness  to 
avow  or  deny   any   declarations  which  Col.  Burr  would 


1804.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  213 

specifically  point  out.  He  concludes  by  saying  "  I  trust 
on  further  reflection  you  will  see  the  matter  in  the  same 
light  with  me.  If  not,  I  can  only  regret  the  circumstance 
and  must  abide  the  consequences.^^  Now,  without  being 
learned  in  the  law  of  duelling,  it  strikes  me  that  Mr. 
Hamilton  might,  without  degrading  himself,  have  stated 
that  he  had  made  no  declarations  in  presence  of  Dr.  ^ 
Cooper,  impeaching  Col.  Burr's  private  character  or  his 
honor  as  a  gentleman,  but  that  his  remarks  were  entirely 
of  a  political  nature,  and  thus  to  have  inyited  Col.  Burr 
to  specify. 

The  reply  of  Col.  Burr  was  acrid  and  ofiensive.  After 
Gen.  Hamilton  had  replied  to  the  second  letter  of  Col. 
Burr,  he  put  into  the  hands  of  Mr.  Pendleton,  (his  friend,) 
a  paper  to  be  communicated  to  Col.  Burr,  in  which  he 
stated,  that  in  answer  to  a  letter  properly  adapted  to  obtain 
from  him  a  declaration  whether  he  had  charged  Col.  Burr 
with  any  particular  instance  of  dishonorable  conduct  or 
had  impeached  his  private  character,  either  in  the  conver- 
sation alluded  to  by  Doct.  Cooper,  or  in  any  other  partic 
ular  instance  to  be  specified,  he  would  be  able  to  answer, 
consistently  with  his  honor  and  the  truth,  "  that  the 
conversation,  to  which  Doct.  Cooper  alluded,  turned 
wholly  on  political  topics  and  did  not  attribute  to  Col. 
Burr  any  instance  of  dishonorable  conduct,  nor  relate 
to  his  private  character;  and  in  relation  to  any  other  Ian 
guage  or  conversation  of  Gen.  Hamilton,  which  Col.  Burr 
will  specify,  a  prompt  and  frank  avowal  or  denial  will  be 
given."  This  declaration,  it  appears  to  me,  entirely  re- 
moved the  cause  of  the  alleged  offence,  and  had  not  Col. 
Burr  been  determined  on  a  combat,  which  in  all  probability 
would  be  fatal  to  one  of  the  parties,  would  have  put  an 
end  to  the  controversy.  Col.  Burr,  however,  declared 
that  he  considered  this  proposition  "  a  mere  evasion,"  and 
persisted  in  his  demand  for  satisfaction.     Any  person  de- 


214  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1804. 

sirous  of  examining  the  whole  correspondence  will  find  it 
in  2  D  avisos  Burr  J  296  to  316.  It  was  conducted,  on  the 
part  of  Col.  Burr,  by  his  friend  and  second  ,Wm.  P.  Van 
Ness,  and  with  his  usual  superior  ability.  Judging  from 
the  style  I  should  think  the  two  notes  signed  by  Mr.  Burr 
were  also  written  by  Mr.  Van  Ness.  How  far  the  dark 
and  malignant  spirit  of  that  talented  man  may  have  aided 
in  producing  this  melancholy  affair  is,  and  always  will 
remain,  unknown.  The  issue  of  the  correspondence,  the 
meeting  and  its  melancholy  and  fatal  consequences,  are 
too  well  known  to  require  to  be  repeated.* 

The  recollection  of  Gen  Hamilton's  revolutionary  servi- 
ces— his  transcendant  talents — his  private  worth — the 
amiable  frankness  of  his  nature,  and  the  integrity  of  his 
heart,  connected  with  his  sudden,  unexpected  and  violent 
death,  produced  a  sensation  among  all  ranks  of  society, 
and  all  parties  in  New-York,  more  universal  than  was  ever 
before,  or  has  since  been  excited.  The  lamentations 
for  Hamilton  had  the  effect  of  politically  sinking  Col.  Burr 
below  that  "  lowest  deep  "  m  which  the  last  election  had 
cast  him.  From  the  moment  Hamilton  fell,  Burr  was 
politically  as  dead  as  he  now  is  naturally. 

By  the  retirement  of  Gov,  Jay  and  the  death  of  Gen. 
Hamilton,  the  federalists  of  New-York  were  left  without 
any  acknowledged  leader. 

Gov.  Lewis  convened  the  council  of  appointment  im- 
mediately after  his  inauguration.  His  election  to  the 
office  of  governor  had  left  a  vacancy  on  the  supreme 
court  bench.  Judge  Kent  ivas  promoted  to  the  office  of 
chief  justice  and  Daniel  1)  Tompkins  was  appointed  a 
judge.  At  the  time  of  his  appointment  he  must  have  been 
about  thirty  years  old.     It  is  somewhat  singular  that  so 

•  I  have  it  from  unquestionable  authority  that  Col.  Swartwout,  on  the  morning 
of  the  duel,  called  on  Col.  Burr  and  found  him  in  a  sound  sleep. 
That  Bun  was  a  man  of  great  personal  courage  there  can  be  no  doubt. 


1804.1  OF    NEW-YORK.  215 

young  a  man  should  have  been  appointed  to  an  office  so 
highly  important^  but  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  senior 
members  of  the  bar,  whose  age  and  talents  had  enabled 
them  to  acquire  any  considerable  reputation,  were  nearly 
all  federalists;  and  it  was  not  and  is  not  the  fashion  to 
confer  important  offices  on  political  opponents.  Mr. 
Tompkins  was  a  young  man  of  fair  reputation,  and  ex- 
ceedingly prepossessing  and  popular  manners.  He  had 
lately  been  elected  a  member  of  congress  from  the  city  of 
New-York,  a  circumstance  which,  considering  his  youth, 
aflforded  evidence  of  the  high  opinion  which  those  who 
knew  him  best  had  formed  of  him.  On  the  same  day  the 
council  removed  Peter  B.  Porter  from  the  office  of  clerk 
of  the  county  of  Ontario,  probably  on  account  of  his  sup- 
port of  Col.  Burr  for  governor,  and  appointed  a  man  by 
the  name  of  Tiffany  in  his  place. 

On  the  10th  of  November,  Maturin  Livingston,  the 
brother-in-law  ot  Gov.  Lewis,  was  appointed  recorder  of 
New-York.  If  we  are  to  believe  the  federal  newspapers, 
this  appointment  was  not  well  received.  The  manners  of 
Mr.  Livingston,  they  alleged,  were  extremely  unpopular. 
He  had  not  been  distinguished  as  a  lawyer,  and  he  was 
known  to  be  more  devoted  to  pleasurable  amusements  than 
to  business.  It  was  also  alleged  that  his  connexion  with 
the  governor,  and  not* his  personal  merit  or  fitness  for  the 
proper  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  office,  had  caused  his 
appointment. 

The  legislature  assembled  in  November  for  the  choice 
of  presidential  electors.  Alexander  Sheldon  was  again 
chosen  speaker.  The  governor,  in  his  speech,  among 
other  things,  informed  the  legislature  of  the  resignation  of 
Gen.  Armstrong  as  United  States  senator,  in  consequence 
of  his  appointment  as  American  minister  to  France.  The 
legislature,  after  appointing  electors,  chose  Dr.  Samuel 
L.  Mitchell  as  the  successor  of  Gen.  Armstrong.     Doct. 


216  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1805. 

Mitchell  was  a  learned  maiij  and  had  read  much.  He 
■was  perfectly  honest  and  sincere,  but  almost  ridiculously 
vain.  He  was  well  acquainted  with  books,  but  knew  lit- 
tle of  men.  He  supported  the  republican  party  because 
Mr.  Jeflferson  was  its  leader,  and  he  supported  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son because  he  was  a  philosopher. 

Very  little  else  was  done  at  this  session  except  choosing 
a  senator  in  congress,  and  electors  for  president. 

Upon  the  canvass  of  the  presidential  votes  given  in  the 
nation,  it  appeared  that  out  of  one  hundred  and  seventy- 
six,  Mr.  Jefferson  and  George  Clinton  received  them  all, 
save  fourteen  which  were  given  for  Mr.  Pinckney  of 
South  Carolina  and  Mr.  King  of  New-York.  From  this 
canvass  may  be  seen  the  prodigious  increase  of  strength 
of  the  republican  party  within  a  very  few  years. 

On  the  22nd  January,  1805,  the  legislature  again  met 
It  is  creditable  to  Gov.  Lewis  that  on  the  5th  day  of  Feb- 
ruary he  sent  an  excellent  and  special  message  to  the 
legislature,  in  which  he  strongly  urged  the  importance  of 
encouraging  education,  and  especially  of  elevating  the 
character  and  increasing  the  capacity  for  usefulness  of 
common  schools.  He  stated  that  the  lands  still  owned  by 
the  state  amounted  to  one  and  an  half  millions  of  acres, 
and  he  urged  the  appropriation  of  those  lands  to  the  exclu- 
sive purpose  of  promoting  education,  and  chiefly  in  aid  of 
common  schools. 

In  pursuance  of  this  recommendation,  a  bill  was  brought 
into  the  legislature,  which  became  a  law  on  the  2nd  of 
April,  by  which  the  nett  proceeds  of  the  first  five  hundred 
thousand  acres  of  land  which  should  be  sold,  should  be 
appropriated  as  a  permanent  fund  for  the  support  of  com- 
mon schools.  The  money  paid  for  the  sale  of  these  lands 
was  required  to  be  loaned  out  on  bond  and  mortgage  by 
the  comptroller,  together  with  the  interest,  as  from  time 
to  time  it  should  be  paid  into  the  treasury,  until  the  prin- 


1805.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  217 

cipal  sum  should  be  sufficient  to  produce  an  interest  of 
fifty  thousand  dollars  annually,  when  the  interest  was  to 
be  annually  distributed  among  the  schools.  This  may  be 
said  to  be  the  commencement  of  the  school  fund. 

Judge  Hobert  died  this  year  at  the  age  of  sixty-seven, 
leaving  vacant  the  office  of  district  judge  for  the  state  of 
New-York.  Upon  his  death,  Brockholst  Livingston  was 
appointed  his  successor,  but  he  declined  to  accept  the 
office.  The  vacancy  was  eventually  supplied  b^  the  ap- 
pointment of  Matthias  B.  Talmadge,  who  probably  owed 
his  selection  to  the  influence  of  the  vice-president,  Clinton, 
with  whom  he  was  connected  by  marriage.  This  appoint- 
ment was  an  unfortunate  one.  Judge  Talmadge  never 
had  been  distinguished  for  his  legal  attainments,  and  he 
was  rather  indisposed  to  laborious  application  to  business 
These  circumstances,  together  with  the  bodily  indisposi- 
tion with  which  he  was  affected  soon  after  his  appoint- 
ment, rendered  him  almost'  useless  as  a  public  officer. 
The  consequence  was,  that  not  many  years  afterwards  the 
state  of  New-York  was  divided  into  two  districts,  northern 
and  southern,  and  William  P.  Van  Ness  was  appointed 
judge  of  the  southern  district.  From  this  time  Judge 
Talmadge  performed  very  little  service,  although  he  con- 
tihued  to  receive  his  salary  until  his  death,  which  happened 
about  the  year  1820. 

In  the  assembly  this  year,  the  number  of  federal  mem- 
bers was  less  than  thirty,  but  they  had  for  their  leader 
William  W.  Van  Ness  from  Columbia  county,  a  young  law- 
yer possessing  talents  of  high  promise.  He  was  a  man 
naturally  persuasive  and  eloquent,  of  fine  intellectual 
powers,  ardent  and  warm  in  his  pursuits,  ambitious  and 
fond  of  distinction,  extremely  pleasing  and  fascinating  in 
his  address,  both  in  public  life  and  in  his  social  intercourse; 
with  a  lively  fancy  and  most  brilliant  wit;  his  conversa- 
tional powers  exceeded  those  of  almost  any  other  man  I 


218  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1805. 

ever  saw.  He  was  fond  of  pleasure  and  sensual  indul- 
gence, and  has  been  charged  with  being  lax  in  his  moral 
principles^  but  if  this  were  so,  he  certainly  was  a  man 
who  possessed  much  of  the  milk  of  human  kindness,  was 
ardent  and  frequently  disinterested  in  his  friendships,  and 
humane  and  benevolent  in  his  feelings.  With  these  quali- 
ties, at  the  head  of  his  little  party,  Mr.  Van  Ness  made 
his  influence  and  power  considerably  felt  in  the  legisla- 
ture and  in  the  state. 

Obadiah  German  of  Chenango  county,  although  unedu- 
cated was  a  bold  and  resolute  man,  of  great  native  intel- 
lectual strength  and  vigor.  He  may  be  said  to  have  stood 
at  the  head  of  the  democratic  party  in  the  assembly  during 
this  session. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  winter  session  the  assembly 
chose  for  the  council  of  appointment,  John  Schenck  of  the 
southern,  Joshua  H.  Brett  of  the  middle,  Jedediah  Peck 
of  the  western,  and  Stephen  Thorn  of  the  eastern  dis- 
tricts. 

Previous  to  the  chartering  of  the  State  Bank  in  1803, 
a  company  of  gentlemen,  principally  merchants  in  New- 
York,  had  associated  by  articles  of  partnership,  said  to 
have  been  drawn  by  Gen.  Hamilton,  as  a  joint  stock 
company,  under  the  name  of  the  president,  directors 
and  company  of  the  Merchant's  Bank.  A  similar  com- 
pany was  .formed  in  Albany  about  the  same  time,  called 
the  "  Mercantile  Company."  When  the  State  Bank 
(jompany  was  chartered,  the  Merchant's  Bank  company 
also  applied  for  the  like  grant,  and  it  is  said,  that  some 
ot  the  persons  interested  in  the  State  Bank,  promis- 
ed these  applicants  their  support;  but  the  question  having 
been  taken  on  the  State  Bank  charter,  and  the  bill  incor- 
porating that  bank  having  passed  into  a  law,  the  State 
Bank  now  opposed  them,  and  the  application  of  the 
Merchant's   Bank  company,  was  unsuccessful.     In  1804, 


1805.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  £19 

tne  company  again  applied  and  were  again  unsuccess- 
ful. Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton,  and  those  interested  in  the 
Manhattan  company,  which  had  then  become  a  favorite 
republican  institution,  were  very  active  in  resisting  the 
application  of  this  association  of  merchants. 

The  legislature  of  1804,  did  not  content  themselves 
by  merely  refusing  to  grant  a  charter  to  this  company, 
but  on  the  11th  day  of  April,  they  passed  an  act  re- 
straining banking  by  all  unincorporated  companies  under 
severe  penalties,  and  declaring  all  notes  or  other  secu- 
rities for  the  payment  of  money  to  such  unincorporated 
companies  absolutely  void;  but  they  by  this  act  provid- 
ed that  the  Mercantile  company  in  Albany,  and  the 
Merchant's  Bank  in  New-York  should  have  until  the 
first  Tuesday  of  May,  1805,  to  close  their  concerns.  If 
after  that  day,  they  attempted  to  transact  banking  busi- 
ness they  were  to  be  subjected  to  all  the  penalties  of 
other  unchartered  companies. 

The  Merchant's  Bank  company  at  the  session  of  1805, 
made  another  great  and  vigorous  effort  to  obtain  a  char- 
ter. It  is  not  my  intention  here  to  detail  the  facts  in  re- 
lation to  this  application,  further  than  to  state,  that  it  was 
originally  opposed  by  the  American  Citizen  and  Albany 
Register,  on  party  grounds,  not  because  the  chartering  of 
this  bank  would  be  prejudicial  to  the  public  interest,  but 
because  the  applicants  were  principally  federalists.  Event- 
ually, it  is  true,  it  appeared  that  the  company  did  resort  to 
vile  and  corrupt  means  to  obtain  their  ends.  It  was  proved 
that  several  members  of  the  legislature  had  been  tampered 
with,  and  Judge  Purdy,  who  introduced  in  the  senate  the 
bill  to  incorporate  the  company,  finally  was  compelled 
to  resign  his  seat  to  avoid  expulsion  for  bribery.  Mr. 
Maturin  Livingston  was  sent  to  Albany  by  the  republi- 
cans of  New-York,  to  oppose  the  charter;  but  in  two 
days  after  his  arrival  in  Albany,  changed  his  position  and 


220  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1805. 

became  its  ardent  supporter.  Gov.  Lewis  was  in  favor 
of  incorporating  the  company.  His  reasons,  as  he  stated 
them,  were,  that  the  company  had  commenced  banking 
when  by  law  they  had  a  right  so  to  do,  that  under  the 
faith  of  the  existing  law  they  had  invested  a  large  capital, 
had  erected  buildings  and  incurred  other  expenses,  and 
that  inasmuch  as  the  exercise  of  banking  powers  by  the 
company,  would  not,  in  his  judgment,  be  prejudicial  to 
the  public  interest,  the  legislature  upon  principles  of  com- 
mon justice  ought  to  charter  the  company  or  so  modify 
the  restraining  law  as  to  render  it  inapplicable  to  them. 
No  one,  I  believe,  ever  charged  Mr.  Lewis  with  acting 
from  corrupt  motives.  His  reasons,  in  the  abstract,  and 
aside  from  the  improper  conduct  of  the  applicants,  ap- 
pear to  me  sound  and  satisfactory;  and  yet  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that  the  opposition  to  him  which  was  led  on  by 
Mr.  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer,  was  originally,  certainly 
it  was  ostensibly,  founded  upon  his  declarations  in  favor 
of  this  bank,  an  opposition  which  ultimately  resulted  in 
his  political  ruin  at  least  for  the  time  then  being. 

The  Merchant's  Bank  charter  finally  passed  both  houses 
by  a  considerable  majority,  but  in  the  council  of  revision 
Judge  Spencer  zealously  protested  and  published  his  pro- 
test against  the  passage  of  the  bill;  he  founded  his  protest 
on  two  grounds; 

First,  because  the  public  interest  did  not  require  an  in- 
crease of  banks  or  banking  capital  in  New-York.* 

Second,  because  the  passage  of  the  bill  through  one,  if 
not  both  branches  of  the  legislature,  was  procured  by 
bribery  and  corruption.  In  illustration  of  this  position, 
among  other  allegations  he  stated  that,  in  the  senate  the 
bill  passed  by  a  vote  of  fourteen  to  twelve,  that  Ebene- 
zer  Purdy  was  bribed,  that  he  constituted  one  of  the  four- 

*  There  was  then  only  the  New-York  Bank  and  the  Manhattan  Bank  in  the 
great  city  of  New- York. 


1805.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  221 

teen,  and  if  he  had  voted  in  the  negative  the  bill  would 
have  been  rejected.  But  the  bill,  notwithstanding,  was 
approved  by  a  majority  of  the  council  of  revision,  con- 
sisting of  Lewis,  Kent,  B.  Livingston,  Lansing  and 
Thompson,  and  became  a  law.  No  doubt,  that  during 
this  session,  considerable  dissatisfaction  was  felt  by  the 
republican  members  of  the  legislature  with  Gov.  Lewis, 
which  was  encouraged  by  the  immediate  friends  of  Messrs. 
Clinton  and  Spencer,  but  no  open  outbreak  ensued,  and 
the  legislature  adjourned  at  the  usual  time,  without  trans- 
acting any  important  business,  unless  the  chartering  of  a 
third  bank  in  New-York  can  be  deemed  important. 

Mr.  Broome  having  been  chosen  lieutenant  governor, 
Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  was  nominated  from  the  southern 
district  to  supply  his  place,  and  Mr.  L'Hommedieu's  term 
of  service  having  expired,  he  also  was  nominated  for  a 
re-election  from  the  same  district. 

In  the  address  of  the  meeting  which  nominated  these 
gentlemen,  of  which  Gen.  Bailey  was  chairman,  they  say 
that  they  have  selected  Mr.  Clinton  and  Mr.  L'Homme- 
dieu  as  their  candidates  because  the  proceedings  of  the  le- 
gislature in  chartering  the  Merchant's  Bank,  have  greatly 
alarmed  them,  and  they  charge  the  members  at  the  last 
session  directly  with  corruption.  They  complain  of  the 
conduct  of  their  republican  brethren  in  the  country  as 
being  inattentive  to  their  feelings  and  interest.  "  A  new 
bank,"  say  they,  "  has  been  created  in  our  city,  and  its 
charter  granted  to  political  enemies."  Absurd!  as  if  men 
who  happened  to  be  federalists  ought  to  be  deprived  of 
the  right  of  using  their  money  for  banking  purposes. 

There  was  a  division  in  the  republican  party  in  respect 
to  one  of  the  candidates  for  the  senate  from  the  eastern 
district.  Joseph  C.  Yates,  afterwards  a  judge  of  the 
supreme  court  and  governor  of  the  state,  had  been 
nominated  by  the  republicans  of  Schenectady,  but 
Mr.  Quackenboss  was  nominated  and  supported  by  the 


222  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1805. 

Albanians.  The  Albany  Register  contended  that  the 
nomination  of  Mr.  Yates  was  spurious,  and  that  Mr. 
Quackenboss  was  the  true  republican  candidate.  That  pa- 
per had  a  commanding  influence  among  the  republicans 
of  the  district,  and  it  alleged,  and  probably  truly,  that  a 
large  majority  of  the  democratic  votes  were  cast  for 
Quackenboss,  and  that  the  federalists  generally  voted  for 
Yates. 

The  senators  elected  this  year  from  the  southern  district 
were,  De  Witt  Clinton  and  Ezra  L'Hommedieu,  from  the 
middle,  Peter  C.  Adams  and  James  G.  Graham,  from  the 
eastern,  Joseph  C.  Yates,  Adam  Comstock  and  John 
Veeder,  and  from  the  western  Nathaniel  Locke  and  John 
Nicholas. 

In  the  assembly,  there  was  as  usual  a  large  majority  of 
democratic  members  returned.  It  does  not  appear  that  either 
the  selection  of  candidates  or  the  election  of  members,  turn- 
ed upon  the  predilection  for  or  opposition  to  the  continued 
support  of  Mr.  Lewis  as  the  republican  candidate  for  go- 
vernor. No  doubt,  the  Avar  which  broke  out  in  the  suc- 
ceeding winter  among  the  members  of  the  democratic 
party,  was  foreseen  by  the  leaders  of  both  sections  of  the 
republicans,  but  they  probably  perceived  that  the  public 
mind  was  not  then  ripe  for  an  open  and  public  declaration 
of  hostilities. 


1805.]  OF    NKW-YORK.  222 


CHAPTER   X. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1806,  TO  MAY  1,  1806. 

Among  the  charges  made  by  the  republican  against  the 
federal  party,  perhaps  the  most  prominent  one,  and  that 
which  had  caused  the  greatest  popular  odium  to  attach 
itself  to  the  latter  party,  was,  that  they  were  not  only 
favorable  to  the  principles  of  the  British,  but  were  in  fact 
partial  to  that  nation.  Two  circumstances  had  afforded 
some  countenance  to  this  accusation.  The  one  was, 
that  in  all  previous  disputes  between  this  government  and 
Great  Britain,  in  which  the  British  charged  the  American 
government  with  extending  undue  favors  to  the  French, 
with  whom  the  English  were  at  war,  and  in  all  controver- 
sies which  had  arisen  in  relation  to  the  rights  of  these 
belligerents,  the  federalists  had  generally  taken  sides 
against  the  French  and  in  favor  of  the  British.  The  other 
circumstance  to  which  I  allude  was,  that  in  point  of  fact 
many  more  of  the  tories  of  the  revolution  had  attached 
themselves  to  the  federalists  than  to  the  republicans.  This 
being  the  state  of  things,  the  federalists  of  Albany,  in  my 
iudgment,  committed,  previous  to  the  celebration  of  Ame- 
rican Independence  on  the  fourth  of  July,  a  capital  error. 
The  common  council  of  that  city,  a  majority  of  whom 
were  federal,  passed  a  resolution  that  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  should  not  be  read  as  a  part  of  the  perform- 
ances of  the  day.  The  alleged  reason  for  passing  the 
resolution  was,  that  the  reading  oJ  ^bc  rlo^lq.'-otlon  +ond*>4 
to  perpetuate  prejudices  and  hostile  feelings  against  the 
British  nation,  when  the  causes  of  hostility  had  long  since 
ceased  to  exist.  I  might  remark  that  the  reading  of  that 
document  ought  not,  and  among  an  intelligent  people  it 


224  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1805, 

will  not,  have  that  eflfect.  True,  it  points  out  in  bold 
relief  the  causes  of  the  revolutionary  war,  which  it  charges 
to  improper  acts  of  the  British  government,  but  that  same 
instrument  concludes  with  the  solemn  declaration  that  we 
will  regard  that  nation  as  "  enemies  in  war,  in  peace, 
FRIENDS."  Why,  then,  should  its  reading  perpetuate 
prejudices  1  But,  without  discussing  or  deciding  in  the 
abstract  the  merits  or. demerits  of  the  resolution,  it  strikes 
me,  that  as  a  party  movement,  it  was  extremely  impolitic. 
It  seemed  to  sustain  and  strengthen  the  allegation  that  the 
federalists,  as  a  party,  were  partial  to  Great  Britain,  or 
that  they  disapproved  of  the  liberal  and  just  sentiments 
iontained  in  that  document,  or  both. 

No  man  will  deny  but  that  the  federalists,  as  a  body, 
were  as  sincerely  and  as  warmly  attached  to  this  country 
and  its  civil  institutions,  as  any  other  body  of  men;  and 
yet,  by  little  errors,  such  as  the  one  I  have  mentioned, 
more  probably,  than  from  erroneous  opinions  as  to  the 
great  measures  which  ought  to  be  pursued  by  the  state 
and  nation,  were  they  kept  out  of  power. 

Not  long  after  the  result  of  the  election  was  known,  the 
American  Citizen  and  Albany  Register  began  openly  to 
take  ground  against  Governor  Lewis  and  those  republi- 
cans who  were  known  to  be  friendly  to  him.  On  the 
other  hand,  a  newspaper  printed  in  Poughkeepsie  and 
edited  by  Mr.  Isaac  Mitchell,  called  the  Poughkeepsie 
Journal,  and  supposed  to  be  influenced  by  Doct.  Tillotson, 
the  secretary  of  state,  assailed  Mr.  Clinton  and  Judge 
Spencer  with  much  bitterness.  In  the  course  of  the  sum- 
mer, the  Morning  Chronicle,  the  Burr  paper  in  New-York, 
was  discontinued  J  and  it  was  alleged  that  it  was  joined 
with  the  Journal,  and  that  thereupon  a  new  paper  was 
issued  entitled  "  The  Poughkeepsie  Barometer." 

A  republican  paper  called  the  Plebian,  printed  in  Ul- 
ster county  under  the  management  of  Jesse  Buel,  Esq., 


1805.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  225 

afterwards  editor  of  the  Albany  Argus,  and  state  printer, 
came  out  in  favor  of  Gov.  Lewis,  and  of  course  against 
Mr.  Clinton  and  his  friends.  In  this  controversy  it  has, 
I  believe,  generally  been  conceded  that  Mr.  Clinton  was 
the  assailant.  It  has,  at  any  rate,  never  to  my  knowledge 
been  pretended  that  Gov.  Lewis  manifested  any  hostility 
to  Mr.  C.  or  his  friends  until  they  atts^cked  him. 

Was  there  a  sufficient  ca'use,  or  were  there  any  good  pub- 
lic reasons,  why  Mr.  Clinton  should  have  made  war  on 
Gov.  Lewis  1  Had  he  done  any  act  injurious  to  the  state, 
or  even  to  the  republican  party  as  such  1  I  confess,  I 
have  looked  in  vain  for  such  cause,  or  such  act.  Certainly 
the  simple  declaration  of  Gov.  Lewis  that  the  Merchants 
Bank  company  ought  either  to  be  chartered,  or  to  be  per- 
mitted to  exercise  those  rights,  which  by  the  law  of  the 
land  they  had  a  right  to  exercise  when  they  invested  their 
money,  was  not  a  good  cause  for  denouncing  him.  To 
wage  war  upon  a  public  agent,  who  is  discharging  his 
duties  wisely  and  faithfully,  merely  for  the  purpose  of 
getting  him  out  of  the  way  and  getting  his  place,  under 
the  pretence  that  you  are  acting  for  the  good  of  a  party, 
when  no  single  act  is  designated  showing  that  he  has 
abandoned  the  principles  of  that  party,  is  not  patriotism: 
it  is  Jacobinic  proscription.  Mr.  Clinton  himself  after- 
wards suffered  severely:  bitterly  indeed  did  he  suffer,  by 
the  same  course  of  conduct,  pursued  against  himself. 
Mr.  Clinton  may  have  thought,  he  probably  did  think. 
Governor  Lewis  was  personally  unsuitable,  and,  if  you 
please,  unfit  to  discharge  the  duties  of  governor  of  this 
state.  But,  if  he  thought  so,  he  should  have  said  so,  and 
made  that  the  ground  of  complaint  against  him.  But 
instead  of  this,  he  charged  him  with  bad  faith  to  the  re- 
publican parly,  and  made  war,  not  only  on  him,  but  on 
all  others  who  manifested  a  disposition  to  support  him. 
Having   gained  a  numerical  majority  of  the  republican 

15 


226  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1805. 

members  of  the  legislature,  he  proceeded  without  cause, 
(for  nothing  which  may  be  called  a  cause  was  assigned  in 
the  address  subsequently  published  by  Mr.  Clinton  and 
his  friendsj)  to  excommunicate  Gov.  Lewis  from  the  re- 
publican church.  Did  not  personal  considerations,  in 
some  degree,  influence  Mr.  Clinton's  conduct  ?  Did  it 
not  occur  to  him  that  if  Gov.  Lewis  and  the  powerful 
family  of  the  Livingstons  were  exiled  from  the  republican 
party,  his  power,  as  the  sole  head  of  that  party  in  the 
great  state  of  New- York,  would  be  immensely  increased  t 
Much  as  I  esteem  and  venerate  the  man,  in  this  I  disap- 
prove of  his  conduct.  The  only  legitimate  ground  upon 
which  parties  can  be  organized,  is  a  difference  of  opinion 
as  to  ineasures.  All  other  party  organizations  are  mere 
combinations  for  the  benefit  of  a  few  to  the  injury  of  the 
many. 

During  the  summer  of  1805  Mr.  Clinton  and  his  friends 
were  not  inactive.  They  foresaw  that  Mr.  Lewis,  in 
connection  with  the  Livingston  family,  would  be  able  to 
detach  a  very  considerable  number  from  the  democratic 
party,  and  if  such  detachment  should  be  joined  by  the 
federalists,  serious  apprehensions  were  entertained  in  rela- 
tion to  the  result  of  the  contest. 

The  duel  with  Hamilton,  and  its  lamented  termination, 
had,  in  connection  with  the  political  sins  of  Col.  Burr, 
entirely  annihilated  him  as  a  politician.  There  were, 
however,  a  number  of  men  in  New-York,  as  well  as  in 
several  other  counties  in  the  state,  active,  ardent  and  influ- 
ential, who  had  supported  Burr,  and  in  consequence  of 
that  support  were  put  in  Coventry  by  the  republican  party. 
Among  the  most  active  of  the  Burrite  faction  in  the  state, 
were  Col.  John  Swartwout,  Matthew  L.  Davis,  Peter  Ir- 
ving and  Ezekiel  Robins. 

What  part  would  this  band  of  men  take  in  the  coming 
contest  ?     Their  chief  had  been  pitted  against  Gov.  Lewis 


1805.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  227 

and  been  beaten.  Col.  Burr,  they  believed,  had  been 
proscribed  by  the  republican  party  in  consequence  of  his 
accepting  aid  from  the  federal  party,  and  his  supposed 
connection  with  them.  Was  it  not  natural,  that  the  Burr- 
ites  should  feel  inclined  to  prostrate  Mr.  Lewis  by  the 
same  means  with  which  they  believed  he  had  overcome 
Mr.  Burr  ?  Should  the  Burrites  be  influenced  by  these 
considerations,  then  Mr.  Clinton  might  reasonably  calcu- 
late on  a  reinforcement  from  their  ranks  which  might,  in 
part  or  whole,  supply  the  loss  which  would  be  sustained 
by  the  desertion  of  the  Livingston  family  and  their  friends. 

It  is  highly  probable  that  Mr.  Clinton  reasoned  some- 
thing in  this  way,  for  although  there  are  various  and 
contradictory  statements,  it  is  very  certain  that  in  the 
autumn  of  1805  Mr.  C.'s  friends,  and  indeed  Mr.  Clinton 
himself,  were  in  communication  with  the  leading  Burrites 
in  New-York,  and  that  the  object  of  the  negotiation  was 
to  bring  the  Burrites  to  act  with  the  republicans  against 
Gov.  Lewis. 

In  the  year  1810,  a  series  of  letters  addressed  to  De 
Witt  Clinton  appeared  in  a  newspaper  printed  in  New- 
York,  and  afterwards  printed  in  a  pamphlet  form  untlerthe 
signatures  of  Marcus  and  Philo  Cato;  long  since  avov.^ed 
to  be  written  by  Matthew  L.  Davis.  These  letters  charge, 
that  in  December,  1805,  Mr.  Levi  McKean,  a  Burrite 
from  Poughkeepsie,  residing  in  the  same  village  with 
Gen.  James  Talmadge,  then  a  zealous  Clintonian,  arrived 
in  New-York  and  called  on  several  of  his  political  friends, 
stating  to  them  that  overtures  had  been  made  "  by  the 
Clintonians  to  form  a  union  with  the  Burrites."  *  *  *  * 
"  He  added  that  he  had  conversed  with  Gen.  Bailey  on 
the  subject,  and  was  desirous  that  Col.  Swartwout  should 
consent  to  an  interview  for  that  purpose.  It  was  suggest- 
ed," says  the  writer,  "  that  as  Mr.  Clinton  had  not  the 
power  of  giving  offices  at  that  moment,  and  thus  publicly 


228  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1805. 

committing  himself,  he  should  give  to  Col.  Burr's  friends 
pecuniary  aid  through  the  medium  of  the  Manhattan 
Bankj  of  which  he  was  a  director,  and  from  which  bank 
they  were  almost  totally  excluded."  That  on  the  7th  of 
January,  1806,  Mr.  Swartwout  received  from  Gen.  Bailey 
a  written  note  inviting  him  to  spend  an  hour  with  him 
that  evening. 

The  invitation  was  accepted,  and  Gen.  Bailey,  on  that 
occasion,  avowed  himself  to  be  acting  as  the  agent  of  De 
Witt  Clinton.  Several  other  interviews  between  these 
gentlemen  followed^  and"  eventually,  according  to  Mr. 
Davis,  an  agreement,  to  the  purport  following,  was  made 
and  concluded  on  the  11th  of  January: — 

^''Firstly — That  Col.  Burr  should  be  recognised  by  the 
union  party,  as  a  republican. 

^^ Secondly — That  the  editor  of  the  American  Citizen 
should  desist  from  all  attacks  upon  him  or  his  friends  ; 
that  he  should  advocate  the  union,  if  it  became  necessary, 
in  his  paper;  and  that  he  should  not  defend  the  Burrites 
as  returning  to  republican  principles,  they  persisting  that 
they  never  had  abandoned  them. 

'■^Thirdly — That  the  friends  of  Col.  Burr, as  it  respected 
appointments  to  offices  of  honor  or  profit  throughout  the 
state,  should  be  placed  on  the  same  footing  as  the  most 
favored  Clintonian,  and  that  their  Burrism  should  never 
be  urged  as  an  objection  to  their  filling  those  offices." 

Mr.  Davis,  in  his  pamphlet,  further  states,  that  on  the 
24th  January,  Mr.  Clinton  himself  met  Col.  Swartwout, 
Peter  Irving  and  M.  L.  Davis,  in  the  evening,  at  the  house 
of  Gen.  Bailey;  that  he  brought  with  him  Mr.  Ezekiel 
Robins,  a  zealous  partizan  of  Burr;  and  that  congratula- 
tions respecting  the  union  mutually  passed  between  the 
contracting  parties.  Affairs  remained  in  this  condition 
until  the  20th  February,  when  a  meeting  was  held  of  the 
leading  Clintonians  and  Burrites  at  Dyde's  hotel,  in  the 


1805.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  229 

"vicinity  of  New-York,  where  the  utmost  good  feeling  was 
manifested  and  toasts  were  drank  highly  complimentary 
to  the  leaders  of  both  parties.  The  Burrites  drank  the 
health  of  Mr.  Clinton,  and  the  Clintonians  toasted  the 
anticipated  union  of  the  republican  party.    [See  Note  Q,] 

Mr.  Clinton  denied  the  truth  of  the  statement  contained 
in  the  letters  of  Marcus.  I  am  far  from  belieying  in  the  ? 
correctness  of  these  representations.  The  letters  were 
written  during  the  time  of  high  party  excitement  and  for 
political  effect.  Most  evidently  the  object  of  Mr.  Davis, 
who  was  an  ardent,  and,  as  many  say,  an  unscrupulous 
partizan,  was  effectually  to  ruin  the  political  standing  of 
Mr.  Clinton  with  his  republican  friends.  That  Mr.  Clin- 
ton should  have  stipulated  for  the  bestowment  of  govern- 
mental patronage,  and  more  especially  that  he  should  have 
expressly  agreed  that  individuals,  by  name,  should  be 
chosen  members  of  the  legislature,  (for,  among  other 
things,  it  was  alleged  that  Mr.  Clinton  promised  that 
Peter  Townsend,  a  Burrite,  should  be  elected  a  member 
of  the  assembly  from  Orange  co.,  and  also  that  Levi  Mc 
Kean  should  be  appointed  clerk  of  Dutchess,)  I  do  not 
believe. 

Upon  the  appearance  of  these  letters  Mr.  Clinton  pub- 
licly pronounced  them  false  and  libellous,  and  gave  notice 
in  the  newspapers  that  he  had  commenced  a  suit  against 
the  publisher.  The  defendant  appeared  and  gave  notice 
that  he  would  prove  the  truth  of  all  his  allegations,  but 
Mr.  Clinton  never  brought  the  cause  to  trial. 

I  have  stated  that  I  do  not  believe  all  the  allegations 
made  by  Marcus;  yet  I  do  believe  that  a  political  negoci- 
ation  of  some  sort  was  commenced  by  Mr.  Clinton  and 
his  friends  wiih  the  Burrites,  and  that,  previous  to  the 
Dyde'    supper,  it  was  supposed  to  have  been  completed. 

That  Gen.  Bailey  was  the  confidential  friend  of  Mr. 
Clinton,  and  that  he  had  repeated  interviews  with  Col. 


230  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1306. 

Swartwoutj  is  not  denied;  that  immediately  after  these 
interviews  a  loan  of  eighteen  thousand  dollars  was  made 
by  the  Manhattan  Bank  to  a  distinguished  Burrite,  (for, 
if  the  allegation  had  been  untrue  its  falsity  might,  and 
would  have  been  proved  by  the  books  of  the  bank);  that 
on  the  24th  January  Mr.  Clinton  met  Col.  Swartwout  and 
his  two  friendsj  in  company  with  Mr.  Robins,  at  the 
house  of  Gen.  Bailey,  was  an  assertion,  which,  if  false, 
might  have  been  disproved;  and  that  there  was  a  meeting 
at  Dyde's  hotel  of  the  leaders  of  both  parties,  at  which 
such  proceedings  were  had  as  afforded  evidence  that  the 
gentlemen  then  present  believed  that  a  cordial  union  had 
been  consummated,  it  seems  to  me  are  facts,  of  the  verity 
of  which  we  cannot  doubt. 

Until  the  supper  at  Dyde's,  it  would  seem  that  the 
knowledge  of  these  proceedings  was  confined  to  a  very 
few  persons;  but,  on  the  publication  of  the  proceedings 
of  that  supper  party,  much  indignation  was  felt  by  many 
republicans  in  the  city,  and  on  the  24th  February,  four 
days  after  the  Dyde  supper,  a  very  numerous  meeting 
was  held  at  Martling's  Long  Room,  at  which  the  union 
and  its  authors  were  denounced  in  unmeasured  terms. 
This  meeting  was  got  up  by  a  few  dissatisfied  Burrites, 
and  many  honest  and  well  meaning  republicans;  and  it  is 
highly  probable  that  the  immediate  friends  of  Gov.  Lewis 
exerted  themselves  to  increase  the  jealousy  of  the  republi- 
cans of  Mr.  Clinton  and  a  few  Clintonian  leaders  in  the 
city,  among  whom  Richard  Riker  and  P.  C.  Van  Wyck 
were  conspicuous,  and  to  fan  the  flame  of  discord  and  en- 
mity among  the  followers  of  Mr.  Clinton.  Be  this  as  it 
may,  this  meeting,  and  the  materials  of  which  it  was  com- 
posed, formed  the  nucleus  of  a  party  in  the  republican 
ranks  which  ultimately  destroyed  the  political  standing  of 
Mr.  Clinton  with  the  majority  of  his  friends.  Hence  his 
democratic  opponents,  for  a  long  time  afterwards,  were 


1806.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  231 

known  in  other  parts  of  the  state  by  the  name  of  "  Mart- 
ling  MEN."  Mr.  Clinton,  who  was  then  at  Albany,  upon 
being  advised  of  these  proceedings,  wrote  to  his  friend, 
Gen.  Bailey,  approving  in  general  of  the  course  pursued 
at  Martling's  long  room,  and  condemning  as  imprudent 
the  conduct  of  his  friends  at  Dyde's.  The  support  of  the 
republican  party,  by  the  Burrites,  he  declared  would  be 
universally  agreeable,  but  that  ought  not  to  be  purchased 
by  a  promise  of  office. 

But  it  is  now  time  to  return  to  Albany.     The  legisla 
ture  met  on  the  28th  January.     Dr.  Alexander  Sheldon, 
of  Montgomery  county,  was  again  chosen  speaker,  and 
Mr.  Southwick  clerk. 

The  governor,  in  his  speech,  among  other  matters,  com 
municated  to  the  legislature  the  case  of  Stephen  Arnold, 
who  had  been  convicted  at  a  court  of  oyer  and  terminer 
held  in  Otsego  county  in  the  summer  of  1805,  of  the  mur- 
der of  a  child.  The  child  had  refused  to  spell  or  pro 
nounce  a  certain  word,  and  to  compel  it  to  do  so  Arnold 
had  chastised  it  so  severely  as  to  cause  its  death.  He 
was  sentenced  to  be  hanged,  but  on  the  day  appointed  for 
his  execution  the  governor  caused  a  reprieve  to  be  deliv- 
ered to  the  sheriff,  being  of  opinion  that  the  facts  proved 
the  culprit  guilty  of  manslaughter  and  not  murder.  For 
this  act  Mr.  Lewis  was  severely  censured  by  his  oppo 
nents,  and  considerable  popular  indignation  was  excited 
against  him.  If  he  committed  an  error  that  error  was  on 
the  side  of  humanity.  In  my  judgment  it  is  discreditable 
to  any  party  to  attempt  to  create  political  capital  by  such 
means. 

The  legislature  passed  a  law  commuting  the  punishment 
of  death  in  Arnold's  case,  for  imprisonment  in  the  state's 
prison  for  life.  Some  of  the  men  who  had  when  at  home 
joined  in  the  clamor  against  Gov.  Lewis  for  suspending 
the  execution  of  Arnold,  and  perhaps  excited  it,  voted  for 


232  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1806. 

a  commutation  of  his  punishment.     Such  vote  was  a  con- 
demnation of  themselves  and  a  justification  of  the  governor. 

There  was  another  part  of  the  governor's  speech  which, 
if-not  more  deserving  of  animadversion,  at  any  rate  expos- 
ed him  to  some  degree  of  merited  ridicule.  Mr.  Lewis 
had,  during  the  revolutionary  war,  been  engaged  in  the 
military  service  of  the  country,  and  he  was  fond  of  milita- 
ry bustle,  parade  and  pageantry.  During  the  autumn  of 
1805  he  had  in  person,  as  commander-in-chief,  inspected 
the  militia  in  most  of  the  counties  in  the  state,  and  in  his 
speech  he  said  much  about  the  militia  and  made  several 
suggestions  as  to  the  best  means  of  improving  their  disci- 
pline and  martial  appearance,  and  in  the  course  of  his  ad- 
dress he  spoke  of  the  importance  of  martial  music,  and 
remarked  that,  "  In  our  military  equipments,  there  is  the 
almost  universal  want  of  ..experienced  drummers.  The 
drum  is  all  important  in  the  day  of  battle."  We  have 
often  heard  of  drumming  up  recruits,  but  never  of  drum- 
ming off  enemies  or  frightening  them  away  by  the  sound 
of  a  drum.  This  sentence  furnished  much  aliment  for  the 
wits  of  that  day. 

The  governor,  in  his  speech,  alluded  in  a  very  proper 
manner  to  the  difficulties  between  the  American  govern- 
ment and  the  belligerents  of  Europe.  He  expressed  an 
apprehension  that  a  war  with  one  or  both  the  belligerent 
powers  might  become  inevitable,  and  he  urged  the  neces- 
sity of  putting  the  state  in  a  posture  of  defence.  He 
stated  the  debt  due  from  New-York  to  the  general  govern- 
ment to  be  seven  hundred  and  sixty-eight  thousand  three 
hundred  and  twenty  dollars  and  fourteen  cents,  of  which, 
according  to  a  previous  understanding,  New-York  had  a 
right  to  expend  five  hundred  and  twenty-four  thousand 
and  sixty-six  dollars  and  seventy  cents  in  fortifying  our 
harbors  and  other  exposed  points,  and  he  invited  the  atten- 
tion of  the  legislature  to  that  subject. 


1806.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  233 

In  the  early  part  of  the  session  the  assembly  proceeded 
to  elect  a  council  of  appointment,  and  De  Witt  Clinton 
from  the  southern,  Robert  Johnson  from  the  middle,  Adam 
Comstock  from  the  eastern,  and  Henry  Huntington  from 
the  western  districts  were  chosen. 

These  gentlemen  had  been  nominated  by  a  general  cau- 
cus of  all  the  republican  members.  The  friends  of  the 
governor  complained  that  this  mode  of  nomination  was 
unusual  J  that  before  that  time  the  custom  was  for  the 
republican  members  of  assembly  from  each  district  to  meet 
and  severally  designate  the  member  of  the  senate  from 
their  district  whom  they  desired  should  be  chosen  a  coun- 
cillor; and  they  insisted  that  had  such  course  now  have 
been  pursued,  Mr.  Clinton  would  not  have  been  selected 
as  the  favorite  candidate  of  the  southern  district.  This 
complaint,  however,  does  not  seem  to  have  produced 
much  impression. 

On  the  31st  of  March,  Mr.  Richard  Riker,  a  member 
from  New-York,  brought  a  bill  into  the  assembly,  "  for 
the  prevention  of  bribery,"  &c.,  by  which  any  person 
who  should  promise,  offer  or  give  any  member  of  either 
house  of  the  legislature  or  council  of  revision,  any  money, 
goods  or  chattels,  or  chose  in  action,  &c.,  with  intent  to 
influence  his  vote,  such  person  should,  on  conviction,  be 
fined  in  a  sum  not  exceeding  one  thousand  dollars,  or  im- 
prisoned in  the  state  prison  for  a  term  not  exceeding  two 
years.  The  bill  also  provided  that  any  member,  &c  ,  who 
should  give  his  vote  in  consequence  of  such  gift  or  prom- 
ise, should  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  high  misdemeanor,  and 
should,  on  conviction  thereof,  be  fined  &c.;  and  the  bill 
was  passed  into  a  law  on  the  seventh  of  April, 

This  salutary  law  was  probably  introduced  in  conse- 
quence of  the  exceptionable  proceedings  of  the  applicants 
for  a  charter  of  the  Merchants  Bank,  the  preceding  session. 
Considering  the  quarter  from  which  this  bill  emanated,  is  it 


234  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1806. 

not  probable  that  one  object  in  introducing  it,  was  to  fasten 
more  strongly  in  the  public  mind  the  odious  character  of 
that  transaction,  in  which  some  of  the  governor's  friends 
were  implicated  1 

In  accordance  with  the  same  policy,  Mr.  Clinton  had, 
on  the  15th  March,  offered  a  resolution  in  the  senate  for 
the  expulsion  of  Ebenezer  Purdy,  for  the  reason  that  he 
had  been  bribed,  and  for  his  attempt  to  bribe  Stephen 
Thorne  and  Obadiah  German.  A  day  was  appointed  to 
act  on  the  resolution,  but  on  the  day  after  it  was  offered 
Mr.  Purdy  resigned. 

On  the  26th  March,  the  council  of  appointment  com- 
menced their  operations  by  the  removal  of  Maturin  Liv- 
ingston from  the  office  of  recorder  of  the  city  of  New- York, 
and  the  appointment  of  Pierre  C.  Van  Wyck  in  his  place. 
They  also  removed  Thomas  Tillotson  from  the  office  of  sec- 
retary of  state,  and  appointed  Elisha  Jenkins  his  successor. 
Against  these  removals,  the  governor  and  Mr.  Huntington 
entered  their  protest.  Mr.  Huntington  was  a  warm  per- 
sonal and  political  friend  of  Mr.  Clinton,  but  he  was  also 
a  man  of  great  moderation  and  prudence  and  altogether 
incapable  of  persecution  or  proscription.  The  removal  of 
these  officers,  without  any  charge  of  official  misconduct, 
and  merely  because  they  were  connected  with  and.  sup- 
porters of  the  governor,  appeared  to  him  too  much  like 
persecution,  and  altogether  inconsistent  with  the  maxims 
which  always  governed  that  excellent  man's  conduct.  The 
war  upon  the  governor  was  now  open  and  undisguised. 
It  was  heated  and  extremely  virulent.  In  all  the  minor 
appointments,  such  as  sheriffs,  county  clerks,  surrogates, 
county  judges  and  justices  of  the  peace,  those  candidates 
were  preferred  by  the  council  who  were  known  to  be  hos- 
tile to  the  re-election  of  Gov.  Lewis. 

By  the  appointment  of  Mr.  Jenkins  secretary  of  state 
the  office  of  comptroller  was  left  vacant,  and  that  vacancy 


1806.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  235 

was  supplied  by  the  appointment  of  Archibald  Mclntyre, 
who  long  held  the  office  and  discharged  its  duties  in  a  man- 
ner highly  satisfactory  and  beneficial  to  the  public,  and 
creditable  to  himself. 

When  the  dissensions  between  Gov.  Lewis  and  Mr. 
Clinton  commenced,  and  after  they  had  progressed  for  a 
considerable  time,  the  federalists  looked  on  with  apparent 
indifFerencej  but  no  sooner  was  the  war  openly  declared 
than  they  generally  avowed  their  determination  to  support 
the  governor.  William  W.  Van  Ness  was  one  of  his 
most  zealous  and  efficient  federal  partizans.  At  the 
annual  election  in  April,  the  party  rallied  with  considera- 
ble energy,  and  in  the  counties  where  they  were  sure  of  a 
federal  majority,  they  supported  federal  candidates  on 
federal  principles;  in  other  counties,  where  two  republi- 
can tickets  were  run,  they  supported  candidates  who  v/ere 
friendly  to  the  governor.  The  governor's  republican 
friends  also  made  a  rally,  and  the  result  was,  that  including 
federalists,  a  majority  of  the  members  returned  to  the  as- 
sembly were  favorable  to  Gov.  Lewis. 

In  the  senate,  from  the  southern  district,  Benjamin  Coe 
and  Johnathan  Ward  were  elected;  from  the  middle,  Eli- 
sha  Barlow  and  James  Burt;  from  the  eastern,  Jacob 
Snell,  and  from  the  western,  John  Ballard,  Salmon  Buel 
and  Jacob  Gebhard. 

Eventually,  the  senators  from  the  middle  district,  and 
Mr.  Snell  from  the  eastern,  attached  themselves  to  the 
party  which  supported  Gov.  Lewis. 


236  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1807. 


CHAPTER    XI. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1806,  TO  MAY  1,  1807, 

Shortly  after  the  election,  a  circumstance  occurred 
which  showed  that  the  Lewisites  or  quids,  as  they  w«re 
called,  were  equally  disposed  with  their  adversaries  to  use 
the  appointing  power,  so  as  to  reward  friends  and  punish 
opponents.  The  corporation  election  of  New- York  had 
resulted  in  the  choice  of  some  federalists  and  some  Lewis- 
ites, but  both  classes  united,  constituted  a  majority  over 
the  Clintonians  in  the  common  council.  The  new  board 
forthwith  set  about  removing  such  of  the  Clintonians  as 
held  offices  during  the  pleasure  of  the  common  council, 
for  no  other  cause  than  the  political  opinions  which  they 
entertained,  among  whom  was  the  comptroller  of  the  city. 
A  party  character  was  given  to  nearly  all  the  new  ap- 
pointments. 

The  republican  friends  of  the  governor,  perceiving  that 
he  could  not  be  nominated  for  a  re-election  by  a  majority 
of  the  democratic  members  of  the  legislature,  in  order  to 
get  him  in  the  field  as  the  candidate  of  a  portion  of  the  re- 
publicans, got  up  a  meeting,  on  the  1st  of  January,  1807, 
in  the  city  of  New-York,  of  which  Thomas  Storm  was 
chairman,  and  this  meagre  assembly  in  due  form  nomina- 
ted Mr.  Lewis  as  the  republican  candidate  foi  governor. 

Very  active  measures  were  taken  to  secure  a  sufficient 
number  of  the  republican  members  of  the  assembly,  cho- 
sen in  April  preceding,  who,  in  conjunction  with  the 
federalists,  would  constitute  a  majority  of  that  body;  and 
by  this  means  the  friends  of  the  governor  hoped  to  be  able 
to  elect  a  speaker  and  a  council  of  appointment,  who  would 
be  favorable  to  his  views.     Circular  letters  were  written 


1807.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  237 

to  all  the  republican  members  who  were  not  known  to  be 
decided  Clintonians,  requesting  that  on  their  arrival  in 
Albany  they  would  call  on  the  treasurer,  Mr.  Abraham  G. 
Lansing,  or  on  his  son,  G.  Y.  Lansing,  Esq.  who  were 
supporters  of  Gov.  Lewis,  for  the  purpose  of  consultation. 
This  legislature  convened  on  the  27th  of  January.  Of  the 
members  of  assembly  who  were  in  attendance  on  the  first 
day,  eighteen  were  federalists  and  the  residue  were  elected 
as  republicans. 

Andrew  McCord  of  Orange  county,  was  the  Lewisite 
candidate  for  speaker,  and  Doct.  Sheldon  the  Clintonian. 
Upon  canvassing  the  votes  it  appeared  that  Mr.  McCord 
had  eleven  majority.  Mr.  Garret  Y.  Lansing  was  elected 
clerk  by  six  majority  over  Mr.  South  wick.  ^ 

The  governor's  speech  was  a  very  ordinary  production, 
and  seems  to  me  inferior  to  his  former  addresses.  On  the 
second  day  of  the  session,  the  assembly  proceeded  to  choose 
a  council  of  appointment,  and  a  Lewisite  council  was 
chosen. 

The  following  was  the  state  of  the  vote: — Thomas 
Thomas,  fifty-one;  James  Burt,  fifty-four;  Edward  Savage, 
fifty-two;  John  Nicholas,  fifty-two;  E.  L'Hommedieu, 
forty-four;  Peter  C.  Adams,  forty-four;  John  Veeder, 
forty-three;  Nathan  Smith,  forty-three. 

The  Clintonians  confidently  charged  that  Mr.  William 
W.  Van  Ness  was  to  be  appointed  attorney  general,  in  con-. 
sideration  of  the  eighteen  federal  votes  which  were  given, 
and  which  enabled  the  Lewisites  to  succeed  in  the  choice 
of  the  speaker  and  council  of  appointment.  It  so  turned 
out  that  he  obtained  a  better  office.  Gen.  John  Smith 
having  been  elected  senator  of  the  United  States  to  sup 
ply  a  vacancy,  his  term  expired  on  the  4th  March,  1807, 
and  the  two  sections  of  the  democratic  party  so  far  united 
as  to  re-elect  him  on  the  first  day  of  February. 


238  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1807. 

On  the  first  clay  of  the  meeting  of  the  new  council  of 
appointment,  De  Witt  Clinton  was  removed  from  the 
Mayoralty  of  New- York,  and  Smith  Thompson  one  of  the 
judges  of  the  supreme  court,  appointed  in  his  place. 
Judge  Thompson,  however,  wisely  declined  to  accept  the 
appointment,  and  subsequently  Col.  Marinus  Willett  was 
appointed  to  that  office. 

On  the  16th  of  February,  the  council  proceeded  to 
remove  Pierre  C.  Van  Wyck  from  the  office  of  recorder 
of  New-York,  and  re-appoint  Maturin  Livingston,  they 
also  removed  Mr.  Jenkins  and  restored  to  Doct.  Tillotson 
the  office  of  secretary  of  state.  Thomas  Morris,  a  dis- 
tinguished federalist,  was  appointed  clerk  of  the  city 
of  ^ew-York,  and  Teunis  Wortman  was  removed  to 
make  place  for  him.  Among  other  appointments  in 
New-York,  I  observe  that  Isaac  Kibbe  an  active  Burrite, 
and  afterwards  notorious  as  a  lobby  member  and  zealous 
supporter  of  De  Witt  Clinton,  was  appointed  to  the  office 
of  harbor  master  of  the  city  of  New-York.  This  coun 
cil  exercised  their  power  to  its  full  extent  in  removing 
those  whose  political  course  rendered  them  obnoxious,  and 
in  the  appointment  of  their  own  partisans. 

On  the  evening  of  the  very  day,  (the  16th  February,) 
when  the  council  of  appointment  made  the  removal  of 
De  Witt  Clinton  and  the  other  great  state  officers,  the  ma 
jority  of  the  republican  members  of  the  legislature  met  in 
caucus  and  nominated  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  as  their  can- 
didate for  governor.  It  may  seem  unaccountable,  that  a 
person  so  little  known  in  the  political  field,  should  have 
been  selected  as  a  candidate  for  the  most  important  office 
in  the  state.  It  is  probable  that  the  following  were  some 
of  the  circumstances  which  led  to  the  nomination  of  Mr. 
Tompkins. 

Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer  were  the  only 
two  prominent  men  at  that  time  in  the  republican  party 


1807.] 


OF   NEW-YORK.  239 


opposed  to  Gov.  Lewis,  who  would  have  been  much 
thought  of  for  governor.  The  whole  artillery  of  the 
Livingston  party  had  for  some  time  been  directed  towards 
Mr.  Clinton.  He  was  represented  as  exercising  dictatorial 
authority  over  his  partyj  his  influence  by  means  of  his 
own  political  power  and  the  popularity  of  his  uncle  was 
said  to  be  unreasonably  great,  and  his  manners  and  de- 
portment were  cold,  repulsive  and  unpopular;  besides, 
the  party  opposed  to  Mr.  Lewis,  wished  to  alarm  the 
jealousies  of  the  people  against  the  overgrown  power  and 
influence  of  the  Livingston  family,  which  they  could  not 
with  so  much  advantage  and  effect  do,  if  they  had  for 
their  candidate  a  principal,  though  a  junior  member  of  the 
Clinton  family. 

It  is  not  known  that  Judge  Spencer  was  desirous  of  the 
the  nomination,  and  if  he  was,  nearly  the  same  objections 
existed  against  him  as  against  Mr.  Clinton.  He  had  mar- 
ried a  sister  of  that  gentleman  for  his  second  wife,  and  was 
therefore  considered  one  of  the  Clinton  family,  and  he 
had  for  many  years  been  considered  so  closely  united 
with  Mr.  C.  in  all  his  movements,  that  in  the  public  eye 
the  act  of  one  was  considered  the  act  of  the  other.  He 
too,  though  highly  esteemed  as  a  judge,  was  never  per- 
sonally popular  among  the  mass  of  the  people. 

Mr.  Tompkins  had,  it  is  true,  been  but  a  short  time  be- 
fore the  people  as  a  judgej  but  during  that  time  he  had 
held  circuits  in  almost  every  county  in  the  state,  and  was 
by  that  means  personally  known  to  a  vast  many  people. 
His  appearance  was  extremely  prepossessing,  his  manners 
highly  popular,  and  his  address  was  every  way  pleasing. 
And  here  let  me  remark,  that  there  is  no  position  in  social 
life  so  favorable  to  acquiring  the  esteem  and  confidence  of 
the  people  as  that  of  a  circuit  judge  of  the  supreme  court, 
if  his  manners  are  fascinating  and  agreeable.  He  goes 
into  a  county  where  he  is  a  stranger,  and  there  meets  at 


240  POLITICAL    HISTORY.  [1807. 

the  court  house,  grand  and  petit  jurors,  witnesses  and  spec- 
tators from  almost  every  neighborhood  in  the  county. 
The  ordinary  discharge  of  the  duties  of  his  office  presents 
him  as  the  friend  of  virtue  and  good  order,  the  protector  of 
the  innocent,  the  detector  of  frauds,  oppression  and  crime, 
and  the  minstering  angel  of  pure  and  unadulterated  jus- 
tice. What  situation  in  social  life,  in  a  free  gcvernment, 
can  be  more  favorable  to  the  acquisition  of  the  confidence, 
esteem  and  love  of  the  people?  To  all  these  advantages 
Mr.  Tompkin's  added  another.  He  had  no  family  con- 
nections to  control  him,  or  for  whom  he  would  be  desirous 
to  provide*  and  his  talents  were  not  considered  of  such 
superior  order  as  to  excite  the  jealousy  of  such  men  as 
Clinton  and  Spencer.  Indeed,  I  have  frequently  thought 
that  these  gentlemen  under  estimated  the  talents  of  Mr. 
Tompkins;  and  if  so,  it  is  not  impossible  that  they  might 
have  more  readily  acceded  to  his  nomination  on  that 
account,  under  the  impression  that  they  could  more 
easily  mould  him  to  their  purposes;  and  if  not,  that  there 
would  be  no  difficulty  in  getting  rid  of  him. 

John  Broome  was  nominated  for  re-election  as  lieuten- 
ant governor. 

The  address  was  signed  by  sixty-five  republican  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature,  being  a  majority  of  the  whole 
number  of  republicans  in  both  houses.  I  have  carefully 
examined  this  address,  and  it  is  remarkable,  that  it  does  not 
set  forth  any  ground  of  principle  as  a  reason  why  Mr. 
Tompkins  ought  to  be  preferred  to  Mr.  Lewis.  Soon  after 
this,  the  Lewisite  republican  members  of  the  legislature 
held  a  meeting  and  nominated  for  re-election  Gov.  Lewis, 
and  they  nominated  Thomas  Storm  for  lieutenant  govern- 
or.    Their  address  was  signed  by  forty. five  members. 

About  this  time  Brockholst  Livingston  was  appointed 
an  associate  judge  of  the  supreme  court  of  the  United 
States,  and  it  became  a  question  in  which  the  public  felt 


1807.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  241 

a  deep  interestj  who  should  be  his  successor.  The  names  of 
John  Woodworth,  Jonas  Piatt,  and  William  W.  Van  Ness, 
were  mentioned  in  the  newspapers  as  candidates,  but  the 
council  did  not  think  it  expedient  at  that  time,  nor  in- 
deed until  after  the  general  election,  to  act  on  that  ques- 
tion. It  is  probable  they  were  unwilling  to  make  the 
appointment  before  the  election,  fearing  on  the  one  hand, 
that  if  they  selected  a  federalist  they  should  offend  their 
republican  friends, ^nd  on  the  other,  if  they  appointed  a 
republican  that  they  would  displease  the  federalists.  To 
such  miserable  straits  the  fragments  of  parties  are  always 
liable  to  be  driven,  when  their  power  and  ascendency  de- 
pends on  the  action  of  a  party  to  which  they  are  in  prin- 
ciple opposed. 

I  have  before  remarked,  that  the  advocates  of  Gov. 
Lewis  insisted  that  the  sole  cause  of  the  opposition  to 
him  was  his  refusal  to  be  subservient  to  the  individual 
views  of  De  Witt  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer.  In  sup- 
port of  this  charge,  on  the  6th  of  April,  Chancellor  Lan- 
sing was  induced  to  publish  the  reasons  which  prompted 
him  to  decline  the  nomination  of  governor  in  1804.  It  will 
be  recollected  that  before  the  nomination  of  Lewis,  Lan- 
sing was  nominated,  and  accepted  the  nomination,  but  that 
not  long  after  his  acceptance  he  addressed  a  letter  to  Mr. 
Purdy,  the  chairman  of  the  caucus  which  nominated  him, 
stating,  that  events  had  occurred  subsequent  to  his  ac- 
ceptance of  the  nomination,  which  had  induced  him  to 
believe  that  he  was  mistaken  in  supposing  that  he,  as  go- 
vernor, could  be  useful  in  promoting  the  republican  inte- 
rest in  the  state.  The  chancellor  now  informed  the  pub- 
lic what  those  "  events"  were.  He  stated  that  a  few  days 
after  his  nomination,  in  an  interview  with  Gov.  Clinton, 
"  an  attempt  was  made  by  them  to  induce  me,"  (these  are 
his  words,)  "  to  pledge  myself  for  a  particular  course  of 
conduct  in  the  administration  of  the  government  of  the 

16 


242  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1807. 

state."  He  adds,  that  he  declined  to  give  such  pledge. 
That  immediately  afterwards  he  learned  from  Doct.  Til- 
lotson  that  Mr.  Clinton  had  thrown  out  some  mysterious 
expressions  against  him,  and  that  he  had  read  to  him, 
(Tillotson)  letters  from  Washington,  charging  the  chan- 
cellor with  having  made  stipulations  with  Aaron  Burr. 
Mr.  Lansing  further  stated,  that  the  mode  in  which  his 
nomination  was  announced  in  the  Albany  Register  was 
singular,  and  the  manner  exceptionable,  which  he  believed 
was  premeditated  and  intentional,  because,  late  in  the  eve- 
ning before  that  article  appeared  in  the  Register,  Judge 
Tayler,  De  Witt  Clinton,  the  governor's  private  secre- 
tary and  Solomon  Southwick  had  been  seen  together  com- 
ing out  of  the  office  of  the  editor  of  that  paper.  From 
these  circumstances  the  chancellor  inferred,  that  if  elected 
governor  his  situation  w^ould  be  very  uncomfortable,  un- 
less he  should  carry  into  effect  the  wishes  and  views  of 
Mr.  Clinton,  Judge  Spencer,  Judge  Tayler,  and  their  im 
mediate  friends. 

Mr.  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer  very  promptly  denied 
that  they  had  expressed  any  unfavorable  opinion  of  the 
chancellor,  or  that  they  had  ever  exhibited  any  letter  from 
a  Washington  correspondent,  containing  any  imputations 
against  him;  and  the  vice-president,  by  a  letter  written  at 
Washington,  dated  14th  of  April,  also  denied  that  he  had 
attempted  to  induce  Mr.  Lansing  to  pledge  himself,  in 
case  of  his  election  as  governor,  that  he  would  pursue 
any  particular  course  other  than  a  general  republican  one. 
To  these  publications  and  statements  Chancellor  Lansing 
replied,  that  after  his  nomination  the  vice-president,  then 
governor,  sent  for  him  to  call  and  see  him,  that  he  stated 
that  some  of  his  friends  were  suspicious  of  him,  (the 
chancellor,)  and  in  the  course  of  the  conversation  Gov. 
Clinton  remarked,  that  he  was  spoken  of  as  likely  to  be 
chosen  the  next  vice-president,  that  if  Mr.  Lansing  should 


1807.}  OF    NEW-YORK.  243 

be  elected  governor,  the  office  of  chancellor  would  be  va- 
cant, and  that  De  Witt  Clinton  had  been  mentioned  as  a 
suitable  person  to  fill  that  office.  Mr.  Lansing  states  that 
he  replied,  that  in  case  the  office  of  chancellor  should 
become  vacant,  in  his  judgment  the  senior  judicial  law 
officer  ought  to  be  appointed  to  that  office.  On  the  20th 
of  April,  Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  again  replied,  that  he  never 
had  any  conversation  about  the  office  of  chancellor  in  con- 
nection with  himself;  and  that  he  would  not  accept  it,  if 
it  were  offered  him.  Some  further  correspondence  of 
considerable  asperity  and  bitterness,  took  place  between 
Judge  Spencer  and  Chancellor  Lansing;  but  after  the 
election  nothing  further  was  heard  about  the  controversy. 
The  probability  is,  that  there  was  some  misunderstand 
ing  and  misrecollection  on  both  sides.  We  all  know  that 
it  is  quite  impossible  for  men  in  public  life  to  recollect 
with  accuracy,  casual  conversations  among  friends.  No- 
thing is  more  likely,  and  supported  by  Chancellor  Lan 
sing's  assertion,  scarcely  anything  can  be  more  certain,  than 
that  Gov.  George  Clinton,  who  had  long  been  the  decided 
personal  and  political  friend  of  Mr.  Lansing,  should,  in 
conversing  with  him,  being  desirous  to  make  a  provision 
for  his  favorite  nephew,  have  mentioned  him  as  a  fit  person 
'  for  the  office  of  chancellor,  and  should  have  endeavored  to 
prepossess  the  man,  who  it  was  then  believed  would  have 
the  power  of  disposing  of  the  office,  in  favor  of  that 
nephew.  At  the  same  time,  those  who  knew  De  Witt 
Clinton  well  in  after  life,  will  readily  give  him  credit  for 
sincerity,  when  he  declared  he  would  not  take  the  office  of 
chancellor  if  it  were  tendered  to  him.  Nothing  is  more 
certain  than  that  he  was  far  from  desiring  a  judicial  office. 
Mr.  Lansing  had  no  doubt  reason  to  believe,  and  did  be- 
lieve, that  Mr.  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer  wished  to  be 
able  to  exercise  a  great  influence  over  any  state  adminis- 
tration   which    they    should  aid  in  creating;  and  feeling 


244  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1807. 

himself  determinedj  if  he  accepted  office,  to  act  inde- 
pendent ofj  and  uncontrolled  by  any  one,  he  was  jealous  that 
they  were  at  heart  opposed  to  him.  This  view  of  the  af- 
fair enables  us,  I  think,  to  account  satisfactorily  for  the 
apparent  contradictory  statements  of  the  several  parties 
without  imputing  intentional  error  to  any  one  of  them. 

The  temporary  control  by  Gov.  Lewis  of  the  state 
patronage,  was  of  very  little  use  to  him.  Indeed,  it  is  not 
improbable  that  it  was  more  injurious  than  beneficial.  A 
few  clamorous  friends  in  each  county  compelled  him  to 
make  some  removals,  and  to  give  his  appointments  a  party 
character,  in  every  considerable  neighborhood  in  the 
state.  He  dared  not  appoint  federalists,  because  even 
the  appointment  of  a  federalist  to  the  petty  office  of  jus- 
tice of  the  peace,  would  be  denounced  and  harped  upon 
as  an  evidence  that  he  had  become  a  traitor  to  the  party 
who  had  clothed  him  with  power.  A  large  majority  of 
the  republicans  in  every  part  of  the  state  were  opposed 
to  him.  As  he  would  not  appoint  federalists  nor  Clinto- 
nians,  the  circle  within  which  he  could  make  the  selection 
was  extremely  limited.  Hence,  unfit  men  were  in  many 
cases  appointed.  A  comparison  between  the  person  appoint- 
ed, because  he  was  a  republican  friend  of  the  governor ^ 
with  Clintonian  and  federal  citizens  in  the  same  neighbor- 
hood, of  respected  moral  standing  in  society,  talents  and 
personal  fitness  for  the  station,  was  frequently  very  unfa- 
vorable to  the  office-holder;  and  ordinary  men  could  hard- 
ly avoid  estimating  the  merits  of  the  administration 
by  the  merits  of  its  chosen  officers.  The  federalists,  too, 
were  disgusted  with  his  course.  Many  of  them,  greedy 
for  office,  could  not  perceive  the  reason  why  they  should 
be  called  on  to  support  a  governor  who  treated  them  as 
aliens.  Others  felt  a  hearty  contempt  for  his  timidity  and 
want  of  decision  of  character  and  boldness  of  action. 
The  members  of  his  council  did  not  always  harmonize  in 


1807.]  OF    NEW-YOKK.  245 

their  views.  Mr.  John  Nicholas,  the  member  from  the 
western  district,  had  recently  emigrated  from  Virginia  to 
the  county  of  Ontario.  He  had,  while  he  resided  in  Vir- 
ginia, been  a  member  of  the  house  of  representatives  of 
the  United  States  from  that  state,  and  acquired  a  respecta- 
ble standing  in  that  body-  but  in  New-York  he  was  a 
stranger,  and  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  understand  all 
the  sinuosities  of  New-York  politics.  He  was  for  a 
straight  forward,  open  course,  and  for  treating  all  sup- 
porters of  the  state  administration,  whether  republicans  or 
federalists,  alike. 

Mr.  Edward  Savage  was  strongly  prejudiced  in  favor 
of  the  old  republican  party,  of  which  he  had  since  the 
adoption  of  the  United  States  constitution  been  a  uni- 
form member.  I  can  have  no  doubt  his  support  of  Gov. 
Lewis  was  from  pure  and  conscientious  motives,  and  yet  he 
was  complained  of,  as  acting  from  selfish  views.  He  was,  I 
believe,  himself  surrogate  of  the  county  of  Washingtonj 
his  son  John,  the  late  chief  justice,  was  district  attorney 
for  the  counties  of  Washington,  Clinton,  &c.  He  (the 
son,)  was  a  law  partner  of  John  Crary,  Esq.,  and  Mr. 
Savage  procured  the  removal  of  Mr.  Sheppard,  the  clerk 
of  Washington  county,  and  the  appointment  of  Mr.  Crary 
in  his  place.  Thus  three  of  the  best  offices  in  that  large 
and  respectable  county,  were  secured  between  the  mem- 
ber of  the  council,  his  son,  and  his  son's  partner  in  busi- 
ness. This  accumulation  of  state  patronage  naturally  ex- 
cited some  disgust  in  that  part  of  the  state,  f 

Mr.  Burt  was  a  shrewd,  adroit  man,  and  probably  a  bet 
ter  manager  than  either  of  the  other  members;  but  of  his 
particular  views,  I  am  not  advised.  In  addition  to  the 
difficulties  I  have  mentioned,  which  Mr.  Lewis  and  his 
friends  had  to  encounter,  it  was  apparent  that  the  great 
mass  of  the  republican  party  were  against  him,  and  calcu- 
lating federalists  as  well  as  republicans  foresaw  that  the 
t  Sec  Note  H. 


246  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1807. 

question  would  ultimately  be  between  the  federal  and  re- 
publican parties,  and  from  the  strength  of  the  latter  party 
in  the  state,  aided  as  it  was,  by  the  popularity  and  patron- 
age of  the  general  government,  little  doubt  could  be  en- 
tertained of  what  the  final  result  of  such  a  contest  would 
be  in  this  state.  Hence,  many  federalists  seized  the  op- 
portunity, under  various  pretences,  to  desert  from  therr 
former  political  associates,  and  connect  themselves  with  a 
political  party  whose  fortunes  seemed  to  promise  better. 
The  change  from  a  federalist  to  a  republican  was  easily  to 
be  effected.  A  federalist  need  do  nothing  but  proclaim 
himself  an  opponent  to  Gov.  Lewis,  and  he  was  instantly 
declared  by  the  fathers  of  the  church  "  a  genuine  repub- 
lican." 

The  election  terminated  as  might  have  been  anticipated. 
Mr.  Tompkins  was  elected,  by  a  less  majority  than 
Lewis  obtained  over  Burr.  Mr.  T.'s  majority  was  four 
thousand  and  eighty-five. 

The  senators  chosen  at  this  election,  were  De  Witt  Clin- 
ton from  the  southern  district,  Robert  Williams  and  Joshua 
H.  Brett  from  the  middle,  John  Tayler,  John  McLean, 
Charles  Selden,  and  Isaac  Kellogg  from  the  eastern,  and 
William  Floyd  and  Alexander  Rhae  from  the  western 
All  the  senators  elected  were  republican  Clintonians,  ex 
cept  Messrs.  Williams  and  Brett  from  the  middle  district, 
who  were  Lewisites. 

In  order  to  close  the  account  of  the  administration  of 
Gov.  Lewis,  I  may  as  well  mention  in  this  place,  that 
Gov.  Lewis  met  the  council  of  appointment  on  the  ninth 
day  of  June,  for  the  purpose  of  appointing  a  judge  of  the 
supreme  court.  The  council  were  still  divided  in  re- 
lation to  the  proper  candidate.  If  reports  were  correct 
no  two  of  them  agreed  on  their  man. 

Mr.  Nicholas  was,  as  was  said,  for  Jonas  Piatt,  Mr. 
Savage  %r  John  Woodworth,  Mr.  Burt  for  Van  Ness,  and 


1807.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  247 

Mr.  Thomas  for  Maturin  Livingston.  It  was  said  that 
the  governor,  true  to  the  interest  of  his  family,  agreed 
with  Mr.  Thomas.  It  is  very  probable  that  the  federalists, 
apprehending  that  a  division  of  their  influence  between  Van 
Ness  and  Piatt  might  result  in  the  appointment  of  either 
Woodworth  or  Livingston,  were,  by  means  of  the  address 
and  importunity  of  Mr.  Burt,  aided  by  Mr.  Van  Ness 
himself,  induced  to  give  up  Mr.  Piatt,  and  exert  the  whole 
weight  of  their  influence  in  favor  of  Van  Ness.  He  was 
appointed.  Of  his  character  and  talents  I  have  already 
spoken. 

In  looking  back  to  the  year  1800,  one  cannot  help  being 
struck  with  the  reflection,  that  the  great  federal  party  in 
the  state  were  overthrown  by  the  united  exertions  of  the 
Clintons,  Livingstons,  and  Aaron  Burr;  that  Burr  was 
prostrated  by  tho  joint  efforts  of  the  Clintons  and  Living- 
stons, and  that  shortly  afterwards  the  Clintons  and  Liv- 
ingstons fell  out,  and  the  Livingstons  were  overcome  by 
the  Clintons.  This  view  cannot  fail  to  remind  us  of  the 
military  fortune  of  the  celebrated  Roman  Triumvirate, 
and  the  destruction  of  Lepidus  by  the  joint  arms  of  An- 
thony and  Augustus,  and  the  final  overthrow  of  Anthony 
by  Augustus. 

But  although  the  present  victory  elevated  Mr.  Clinton 
to  the  very  pinnacle  of  political  power  in  the  state,  yet 
the  means  by  which  he  obtained  the  victory,  the  princi- 
ples, or  rather  the  want  of  principle,  which  induced  him 
and  his  coadjutors  to  act  in  the  contest,  and  the  enemies 
he  made  during  this  struggle,  when  added  to  those  pro- 
duced by  the  controversy  with  Aaron  Burr,  combined  with 
the  envy  excited  by  his  elevated  political  position  and 
supposed  influence,  seriously  checked  his  advancement, 
and  for  a  time  threatened  his  utter  and  irretrievable  ruin. 


248  POLITICAL   HISTOBT  [1807. 


CHAPTER   XII. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1807,  TO  MAY  1,  1803. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  month  of  May,  1807,  Col.  Burr 
was  brought  before  chief  justice  Marshall,  at  Richmond  in 
Virginia,  on  a  charge  of  misdemeanor,  and  also  of  treason 
against  the  United  States.      [See  Note  R.J 

Although  not  expressly  within  the  plan  of  these  sketches, 
yet  as  Mr.  Burr  was,  for  a  considerable  period  of  time,  a 
distinguished  political  partizan  of  this  state,  I  shall  present 
a  very  succinct,  but  I  fear,  imperfect  view  of  the  singular 
transactions  in  which  he  was  the  principal  actor,  and 
which  caused  his  arrest  and  trial.  After  his  duel  with 
Gen.  Hamilton,  and  after  the  term  of  his  office  as  vice-pre- 
sident had  expired,  he  seemed  to  be  left  alone,  and  aban- 
doned by  all  political  parties. 

The  state  of  public  feeling  in  New- York  was  such,  after 
the  death  of  Hamilton,  that  his  presence  in  that  city  could 
not  be  endured.  In  New- Jersey  he  had  been  indicted  by 
a  grand  jury  for  murder.  Thus  situated,  his  ambitious, 
active  and  restless  spirit  rendered  his  condition  intolerable 
to  himself.  On  the  22nd  March,  but  a  few  days  after  he 
left  forever  the  presidency  of  the  United  States  senate,  he 
wrote  to  his  son-in-law,  Mr.  Joseph  Alston,  that  he  "  was 
under  ostracism.  In  New-York,"  said  he,  "  I  am  to  be 
disfranchised,  and  in  New-Jersey  to  be  hanged.  Having 
substantial  objections  to  both,  I  shall  not,  for  the  present, 
hazard  either,  but  shall  seek  another  country.''''  Accord- 
ingly, early  in  May,  he  left  Philadelphia  for  the  western 
country,  and  arrived  at  Lexington,  in  Kentucky,  on  the 
20th  of  that  month.  After  travelling  with  great  rapidity 
through  that  state,  he  directed  his  course  to  Nashville,  in 


^&i 


imm 


• 


1807.]  OF    NEW-rORK.  249 

Tennessee,  and  from  thence  he  journied  through  the  woods 
to  Natchez.  From  Natchez  he  went  by  land  to  New-Or- 
leans, where  he  arrived  on  the  25th  June,  1805.  At  that 
time,  Gen.  Wilkinson  was  in  that  city,  or  in  its  neighbor- 
hood, and  commanded  the  United  States  troops  stationed 
there.  It  does  not  appear  that  he  remained  long  in  New- 
Orleans,  but  soon  again  returned  to  Lexington,  in  Ken- 
tucky, by  the  way  of  Nashville.  He  was  at  Cincinnati, 
and  at  several  places  in  Ohio,  but  in  a  very  short  time 
made  his  appearance  at  St.  Louis,  in  Missouri,  and  from 
thence  he  travelled  to  Washington,  at  which  place  he  ar- 
rived on  the  29th  day  of  November.  These  immense 
journies  he  performed  in  a  little  more  than  six  monthsj 
before  the  great  western  rivers  were  rendered  navigable 
by  steam,  and  when  the  roads  were  badly  constructed; 
and  through  a  considerable  part  of  the  country  traversed 
by  him  there  were  no  roads  at  all.  His  movements  were 
veiled  in  mystery,  and  all  men  wondered  what  could  be 
the  motive  which  induced  these  extraordinary  journies. 
From  January,  1806,  to  the  month  of  August  following, 
he  spent  his  time  principally  in  Washington  and  Philadel- 
phiaj  but,  in  the  month  of  August,  he  again  set  his  face 
towards  the  west,  and  was  soon  afterwards  found  in  Ken- 
tucky. 

About  this  time  boats  were  provided,  provisions  and 
munitions  of  war  were  collected,  and  men  were  gathering 
at  different  points  on  the  Ohio  and  Cumberland  rivers. 
Government  now  began  to  be  alarmed.  Mr.  Tiffin,  go- 
vernor of  Ohio,  under  the  advice  of  the  president,  (Jeffer- 
son,) seized  the  boats  and  their  cargo,  and  Burr  was  ar- 
rested in  Kentucky;  bat  no  sufficient  proof  appearing 
against  him  he  was  discharged. 

On  the  23d  January,  1807,  Mr.  Jefferson  sent  a  mes 
sage  to  congress,  accompanied  by  several  affidavits,  in 
which  he  gave  the  history  of  Burr's  transactions,  so  far  as 


250  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1807. 

they  had  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  administration. 
The  message  stated  that,  on  the  21st  of  October,  Gen. 
Wilkinson  wrote  to  the  president  that,  from  a  letter  he 
had  received  from  Burr,  he  had  ascertained  that  his  objects 
were,  a  severance  of  the  union  on  the  line  of  the  Allegany 
mountains,  an  attack  upon  Mexico,  and  the  establishment 
of  an  independent  government  in  Mexico,  of  which  Burr 
was  to  be  the  head.  That  to  cover  his  movements,  he  had 
purchased,  or  pretended  to  have  purchased,  of  one  Lynch, 
a  tract  of  country  claimed  by  Baron  Bastiop,  lying  near 
Natchitoches,  on  which  he  proposed  to  make  a  settlement. 
That  he  had  found,  by  the  proceedings  of  the  governor 
and  people  of  Ohio  and  Kentucky,  that  the  western  people 
"were  not  prepared  to  join  him;  but  notwithstanding,  there 
was  reason  to  believe,  that  he  intended,  with  what  force  he 
could  collect,  to  attack  New-Orleans,  get  the  control  of 
the  funds  of  the  bank,  seize  upon  the  military  and  naval 
stores  which  might  be  found  there,  and  then  proceed 
against  Mexico.  The  president  assured  congress  that 
there  was  no  reason  to  apprehend  that  any  foreign  power 
would  aid  Col.  Burr. 

A  considerable  part  of  the  evidence  going  to  show  that 
Burr  entertained  criminal  designs,  depended  on  the  affida- 
vit of  Wilkinson.  It  is  not  my  intention  to  examine  into 
the  proofs  of  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  Burr,  further  than 
to  remark,  that  from  the  character  of  the  vain,  vaporing 
and  unprincipled  Wilkinson,  as  before  and  since  developed, 
no  dependance  can  safely  be  placed  upon  his  statements, 
unless  supported  by  strong  circumstances,  or  other  evi- 
dence; and  I  believe  it  will  not  at  this  day  be  doubted, 
that  if  Burr  plotted  treason,  Wilkinson,  in  the  first  in- 
stance, agreed  to  be  his  accomplice;  that,  as  their  opera- 
tions progressed,  he  began  seriously  to  doubt  of  success, 
and  then  communicated  his  knowledge  of  the  affair  to  the 
government,  in  order  to  save  himself,  and  perhaps  obtain 


1807.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  251 

a  reward;  and  that  he  falsely  represented  to  the  president 
that  he  had  feigned  a  partial  acquiescence  in  the  schemes 
of  Burr,  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  the  execution  of 
his  projects.  That  Burr  himself  was  deceived  by  Wil- 
kinson, there  can  be  no  doubt,  for  had  he  not  been  confi- 
dent Wilkinson  would  act  with  him,  would  he  have  sent 
a  letter  to  hira  in  cypher,  by  Swartwout,  of  the  tenor  of 
the  one  produced  by  Wilkinson  before  the  grand  jury  at 
Richmond  1  But  there  was  other  evidence  besides  that 
of  Wilkinson,  against  Burr,  which  has  never  been  ex- 
plained. His  extensive  and  hurried  journies,  in  the  sum- 
mer of  1805  J  his  preparation  of  boats,  munitions  of  war, 
and  provisions;  his  enlistment  of  men,  and  the  letter  in 
cypher  which  he  sent  to  Wilkinson  ;  what  were  they 
for  1  If  his  object  was  merely  an  attack  upon  Mexico, 
why  did  he  not  openly  avow  it,  when  charged  and  indicted 
for  treason  against  his  country  1  The  one,  he  knew,  was 
comparatively  a  slight  misdemeanor,  the  other,  the  highest 
crime  known  to  the  law.  Again,  unless  Col.  William 
Eaton,  the  man  who  had  then  recently,  so  gallantly  distin- 
guished himself  on  the  Barbary  ccasts,  has  perjured  him- 
self, Burr  did  form  a  treasonable  plot  against  his  country. 
Col.  Eaton,  on  the  26th  January,  deposed,  in  open  court, 
held  before  Judge  Cranch  and  others,  at  Washington,  that 
during  the  preceding  winter,  (1806,)  Burr  called  upon 
him,  and,  in  the  first  instance,  represented,  that  he  was 
employed  by  the  government  to  raise  a  military  force  to 
attack  the  Spanish  Provinces  in  North  America,  and  invi- 
ted Eaton  to  take  a  command  in  the  expedition  ;  that 
Eaton,  being  a  restless,  enterprising  man,  readily  acceded 
to  the  proposal;  that  Burr  made  frequent  calls  upon  him, 
and  in  his  subsequent  interviews  complained  of  the  ineffi- 
ciency and  timidity  of  the  government,  and,  eventually, 
fully  developed  his  project;  which  was  to  separate  the 
western  states  from  the  union,  and  establish  himself  as 


262  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1807. 

sovereign  of  the  country;  that  measures  were  forthwith  to 
be  taken  for  the  conquest  of  Mexico 3  that  the  control  of 
the  Mexican  mines  would  allure  to  his  standard  a  host  of 
gallant  and  enterprising  spirits,  both  of  the  old  and  the 
new  world;  and  that  Gen.  Wilkinson  was  engaged  in  the 
plot,  and  was  to  join  him  with  the  troops  under  his  com- 
mand. According  to  Eaton,  Burr  further  stated,  that  if 
he  could  gain  over  the  marine  corps,  "  and  secure  Trux- 
ton,  Preble  and  Decatur,  he  would  turn  congress  neck  and 
heels  out  of  doors,  assassinate  the  president,  seize  on  the 
treasury,  and  declare  himself  the  Protector  of  an  energetic 
government;"  and  he  solicited  Eaton  to  endeavor  to  per- 
suade Preble  and  Decatur  to  join  in  the  enterprise.  Burr 
did  not  succeed  in  collecting  and  organizing  a  force  on 
the  western  waters;  but,  on  the  1st  day  of  March,  he  was 
discovered  wandering  alone  in  the  Tombigbee  country, 
near  the  line  of  Florida,  by  a  man  named  Perkins,  who 
found  him  in  the  evening  at  a  little  tavern.  Perkins,  at 
first,  was  not  certain  that  the  stranger  with  whom  he  came 
in  contact,  was  Burr,  but,  on  being  satisfied  that  such  was 
the  fact,  procured  a  subordinate  officer,  who  happened  to 
be  stationed  there,  and  a  file  of  seven  men,  who  arrested 
the  western  Emperor,  and  conveyed  him  to  Richmond. 

The  trial  of  the  indictment  against  Burr,  for  treason, 
occupied  many  weeks,  but  he  was  finally  acquitted  by  the 
jury,  without  swearing  any  witnesses  in  his  defence.  The 
acquittal  seems  to  have  been  on  technical  grounds.  To 
convict  of  treason,  proof  must  not  only  be  made  of  a  trea- 
sonable plot,  but  of  an  overt  act,  and  that  act  must  be 
proved  by  at  least  two  credible  witnesses.  The  overt  act 
proved,  was  an  assemblage  of  men  at  Blanerhassett's 
Island  in  the  Ohio  river;  but  it  was  not  proved  that  Col 
Burr  was  present  at  that  assemblage.  This  evidence,  ac- 
cording to  the  view  of  the  court,  was  not  sufficient  to 
convict  him  of  an  overt  act,  within  the  meaning  of  the 


1807.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  253 

constitution,  and  thereupon  the  jury  found  this  extraordi- 
nary verdict,  which  they  refused  to  modify: — 

We  J  the  jury,  say  that  Aaron  Burr  is  not  proved  to  be 
guilty,  under  this  indictment j  by  any  evidence  submitted 
to  us.  We,  therefore^  find  him  not  guilty."  {^Sce  2  Da- 
vis j  384.) 

After  his  acquittal.  Col.  Burr  appears  still  to  have  per^ 
severed  in  the  project  of  making  an  effort  to  detach  Mexico 
from  the  Spanish  government. 

On  the  7th  of  June,  1808,  he  sailed  from  New-York  for 
Europe,  it  would  seem  in  the  hope  of  engaging  the  British 
government,  to  fit  out  an  expedition  against  Mexico,  in 
which  he  would  take  a  part.  In  this  he  was  entirely  un- 
successful. His  application  to  the  French  government 
was  equally  vain  and  useless.  He  spent  four  years  wan- 
dering about  in  Europe.  Very  little  attention  was  paid 
to  him,  and,  at  times,  he  was  reduced  to  the  greatest  ex- 
tremity of  poverty  and  wretchedness.  On  the  8th  June, 
1812,  precisely  four  years  and  one  day  from  the  time  he 
left  New-York,  he  again  landed  in  that  city.  Deserted 
by  his  friends,  destitute  of  the  means  of  living,  loaded 
with  heavy  debts,  and  enervated  by  age,  he  opened  a  law 
office,  as  his  only  means  of  procuring  his  daily  bread. 
But  other,  and  more  appalling  misfortunes  awaited  him. 
He  had  been  in  New-York  but  a  few  days,  when  he  re- 
ceived the  news  of  the  death  of  Aaron  Burr  Alston,  the 
only  child  of  his  only  daughter.  Even  this  melancholy 
event  did  not  terminate  his  calamities.  A  short  time  after 
the  tidings  of  his  grandson's  death  was  communicated  to 
him,  his  daughter,  Mrs.  Alston,  who  seems,  from  her  let- 
ters which  have  been  published,  to  have  been  a  superior 
woman,  anxious  to  see  and  embrace  her  father,  on  the  31st 
day  of  December,  sailed  as  a  passenger  in  a  schooner 
from  Charleston,  for  New-York,  which  was  lost  on  its 
passage,  and  every  soul  on  board  pc-ished.     Col.  Burr 


254  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1807. 

was  now  in  his  old  age,  deprived  of  character,  steeped  in 
poverty,  and  the  only  human  beings  to  whom  he  could 
feel  the  least  tender  affection,  were  snatched  from  him  by 
death.  He  was  left  alone  in  the  world — his  cup  of  calami- 
ties was  full.  I  was  going  to  say,  the  strongest  evidence 
I  have,  that  he  was  a  great  man,  is,  that  he  did  not  sink 
under  this  accumulation  of  his  misfortunes — this  utter 
wreck  of  human  hopes.  Was  it  strength  of  mind  or  in- 
sensibility which  prevented  it  1  Be  this  as  it  may,  he  did 
live;  he  followed  his  profession,  and  mingled  in  society 
for  more  than  twenty  years  afterwards.  He  died  on  the 
14th  September,  1836,  in  the  eighty-first  year  of  his  age. 

Col.  Burr  possessed  several  traits  of  character  quite 
peculiar.  One  was,  an  utter  indifference  to  public  opinion. 
Mr.  Davis,  (2  Davis,  379,  in  a  note,)  says,  that  a  short 
time  before  his  death,  and  when  that  event  was  daily  ex 
pected,  after  informing  him  that  his  death  was  hourly 
expected  by  his  physician,  he  asked  Col.  Burr  whether,  at 
any  time,  he  had  contemplated  a  separation  of  the  union  1 
To  which,  he  replied, "  No,  I  would  as  soon  have  thought 
of  taking  possession  of  the  moon,  and  informing  my  friends 
that  I  intended  to  divide  it  among  them."  But  if  he  was 
sincere  in  that  declaration,  why  did  he  not  furnish  Mr. 
Davis,  who,  he  probably  knew,  would  write  his  biography, 
with  some  satisfactory  explanation  of  his  western  expedi- 
tion 1  Why  did  he  not  give  an  account  of  the  reasons  of 
his  negotiations  with  Wilkinson,  and  his  object  in  writing 
to  him  the  letter  in  cypher  1  The  biography  of  Davis, 
leaves  the  question,  as  to  the  real  motives  of  Burr,  as 
much  in  the  dark  as  it  was  when  his  trial  closed  at  Rich- 
mond; where  the  jury,  who  heard  the  whole  of  the  case, 
evidently  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  Col.  Burr,  if  not 
technically,  was  morally  guilty  of  treason. 

Col.  Burr  seems,  through  his  whole  life,  to  have  taken 
pains  to  envelope  all   his  political  conduct  in  mystery. 


1807.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  255 

He  was  one  of  those  kind  of  men,  who,  if  he  had  a  given 
end  to  accomplish,  preferred  the  accomplishment  of  that 
end  by  indirect,  rather  than  direct  means.  Many  parts  of 
his  life  afford  proof  of  even  an  affectation  of  intrigue  and 
mystery,  which,  instead  of  being  evidence  of  a  great,  is 
evidence  of  a  weak  and  little  mind.  It  was  an  invariable 
maxim  with  him,  never  to  commit  any  thing  on  politics  to 
writing.  So  rigid  was  his  regard  to  this  rule,  that,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Davis,  he  would  not,  in  writing  to  his  wife, 
utter  a  word  on  political  subjects.  Why  should  not  a 
man  commit  to  writing  his  political  views,  and  the  princi- 
ples of  his  political  action  ?  What  has  an  honest  man 
to  fear  from  it  1  The  reasons  which  induced  Col.  Burr 
to  adopt  this  rule  of  conduct  could  not  have  been  founded 
either  on  patriotism  or  integrity.  That  he  was  a  man  of 
great  personal  bravery  there  is  no  doubt.  With  respect 
to  his  talents  there  is  more  difficulty  in  arriving  at  a  satis- 
factory conclusion. 

We  cannot  test  the  powers  of  his  mind  by  his  writings. 
He  has  left  nothing,  except  the  letters  written  by  him  to 
his  wife,  daughter,  and  son-in-law.  These  letters  are 
written  in  an  easy,  familiar  style,  and  are  perfectly  suitable 
and  proper  to  the  connection  existing  between  the  writer 
and  those  to  whom  the  letters  were  addressed.  He  never 
touches  upon  any  serious  or  grave  topic,  either  religious, 
political,  or  philosophical;  yet  they  are  still  of  that  kind 
which  are  perfectly  proper  to  be  addressed  by  a  husband 
to  his  wife,  or  by  a  parent  to  his  children.  They  contain 
no  evidence  but  that  they  were  written  by  a  man  of  a  high 
order  of  intellect,  nor  but  that  they  might  have  been  writ- 
ten by  the  most  common  and  ordinary  educated  man, 
acquainted  with  life.  Of  course,  no  opinion  can  be  formed 
of  the  talents  of  Mr.  Burr  from  the  writings  he  has  left. 

But,  from  the  year  1783,  to  the  year  1800,  Col.  Burr 
was  in  pretty  full  practice  as  a  counsellor  at  law,  and 


256  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [.1807. 

from  1812,  to  within  a  year  or  two  before  his  death,  he 
also  generally  attended  the  superior  courts  of  this  state. 

It  is  certain,  that  during  the  first  period  of  his  practice, 
he  had  a  high  standing  at  the  bar.  To  have  been  viewed 
by  the  public  as  the  rival  of  Gen.  Hamilton,  may,  of  itself, 
be  considered  as  evidence  of  great  legal  learning  and 
talent;  and  yet,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  there  were, 
during  that  period,  but  few  democratic  lawyers  of  eminence 
in  the  city  of  New-York,  and  that  political  partialities 
may  have  contributed  something  towards  assigning  to  Col. 
Burr  the  position  which  he  held.  There  are  gentlemen 
now  living,  who  heard  him  during  his  best  days,  who  do 
not  speak  of  him  as  having  deserved  the  reputation  of  a 
profound,  learned  and  able  forensic  debater.  "  Burr," 
says  Mr.  John  Van  Ness  Yates,  in  a  note  to  Thurlow 
Weed,  written  at  the  request,  I  presume,  of  Mr.  Davis, 
"  was  persuasive  and  imaginative.  He  first  enslaved  the 
heart,  then  led  captive  the  head.  Hamilton  addressed 
himself  to  the  head  only." 

These  remarks  of  Mr.  Yates  were  called  forth  by  a  re- 
quest, coming,  I  presume,  originally  from  Mr.  Davis,  that 
he  would  furnish  the  notes  taken  by  his  father,  chief  jus- 
tice Yates,  of  the  argument  of  Burr,  in  the  celebrated  case 
of  Governeur  and  Kemble.  The  copy  of  the  notes  of  the 
chief  justice,  as  given  by  Mr.  Yates,  reads  as  follows: — 
{See  2  Davis,  21.) 

'*  Burr  for  Plaintiff. — I.  The  great  principles  of  com- 
mercial law  which  apply  to  this  case  are  " — then  follows 
a  hiatus  of  some  lines,  after  which,  as  follows: 

«  II.  The  Plaintiff  "—another  hiatus, 

"III."     (!!!) 

This  concludes,  says  Mr.  Yates,  all  I  can  find.  Mr. 
Yates  adds,  that  his  father's  notes  of  Gen.  Hamilton's  ar- 
gument are  very  copious.  Whether  the  eloquence  of  Col. 
Burr  was  so  fascinating  and  astounding  as  deprived  the 


1807.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  257 

judge  of  the  power  of  taking  notes,  or  whether  his  argu- 
ments were  so  immethodical  and  desultory  that  the  learned 
judge  thought  it  not  worth  his  while  to  attempt  to  follow 
him,  we  are  left  to  conjecture. 

As  respects  the  evidence  of  talents,  as  an  advocate,  af- 
forded by  Col.  Burr,  after  his  return  from  Europe,  I  can 
speak  with  more  confidence.  From  the  year  1812,  to  the 
time  of  his  death,  he  never  made  a  speech  in  any  of  our 
courts,  which  can,  with  propriety,  be  called  an  argument. 
In  the  last  period  of  his  professional  life  he  cannot,  there- 
fore, be  said  to  have  merited,  and  indeed  he  did  not  ac- 
quire, a  standing  above  mediocrity.  He  seemed  to  labor 
more  to  gain  advantages  by  the  meshes  of  technical  rules  of 
practice,  by  contrivance  and  trick,  than  to  succeed  by 
meeting  his  opponent  fairly  in  the  field,  and  elaborately 
discussing  the  merits  of  his  case.  I  am  quite  sure  that  in 
this  statement  I  shall  be  sustained  by  every  member  of 
the  New-York  bar,  who  was  acquainted  with  Col.  Burr. 
The  conclusion"  to  which  I  have  arrived,  is,  that  in  no  pe- 
riod of  his  life  could  he  have  been  a  learned  lawyer,  or  a 
profound,  clear  and  logical  reasoner. 

The  evidence  which  he  afforded  of  talents  as  a  politician 
and  statesman,  is  equally  unsatisfactory.  Neither  in  the 
legislature  of  this  state,  nor  in  the  senate  of  the  United 
States,  did  he  ever  originate  any  great  measure,  nor  can  I 
find  that  he,  at  any  time,  distinguished  himself  in  discus- 
sing any  important  question  raised  by  others.  His  eflforts 
to  obtain  the  gubernatorial  chair  of  this  state,  and  the 
presidency  of  the  United  States,  and  more  especially  the 
latter,  I  have  before  had  occasion  to  show,  independent  of 
all  questions  of  principle,  were  ill  judged,  and  not  well 
adapted  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  end  he  must  have 
had  in  view.  In  the  project  of  his  western  expedition, 
whatever  his  object  was,  that  is,  whether  he  intended  an 
attack  on  Mexico,  or  whether  he  contemplated  a  division 

17 


258  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1807. 

of  the  union,  he  gave  equal  evidence  of  a  want  of  a  sound 
and  discriminating  judgmentj  in  providing  means  adapted 
to  the  accomplishment  of  his  end. 

It  does  not  appear  that  he  had  the  least  prospect  of  any 
foreign  aid.  He  attempted  in  broad  day,  with  the  eyes  of 
an  intelligent  community  upon  him,  to  raise  troops  and 
collect  munitions  of  war,  either  to  commit  hostilities  upon 
a  neighboring  power  with  whom  we  were  at  peace,  or 
make  war  on  his  own  government.  He  must  have  known 
he  could  not  move  at  all  in  such  an  enterprise  without  the 
cordial  aid  of  Wilkinson.  Considering  the  known  cha- 
racter of  that  man,  no  discreet  person  would  have  done  a 
single  act  rendering  himself  accountable  until  Wilkinson 
had  committed  himself  in  such  a  way  as  he  could  not  re- 
cede. Instead  of  which.  Burr  himself  admits  that  he, 
the  great  magician,  was  deceived  by  this  weak,  windy, 
blustering  bragadocia.  This  single  fact  is  evidence  that 
Burr  did  not  know  men  so  well  as  he  claimed  to  know 
them,  and  that  he  was  utterly  unfit  to  conduct  such  an  en- 
terprize.  The  explosion  of  his  plot  and  the  facility  with 
which  it  was  suppressed,  in  spite  of  his  petty  and  puerile 
efforts  to  carry  it  into  effect;  and  his  capture  by  a  subal- 
tern officer  and  seven  men,  furnisha  just  and  proper  com- 
ment on  the  ability  with  whichit  was  contrived  and  attempt- 
ed to  be  executed. 

On  the  whole,  my  conclusion  is,  that  Aaron  Burr  was 
a  man  of  imposing  and  fascinating  manners,  rapid  and 
quick  perceptions,  possessed  of  an  uncommon  share  of 
cunning,  ambitious,  imaginative  and  reckless  about  the 
means  he  employed  to  accomplish  his  ends;  but  defective 
in  the  deliberating,  comparing  and  adjudicating  powers  of 
mind.  If  he  was  a  very  cunning  man,  he  was  not  a  very 
wise  one;  and  if,  at  any  period  of  his  life  he  was  brilliant 
as  an  orator,  he  never  was  a  profound  reasoner. 


1807.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  259 

The  fate  of  Col.  Burr  presents  a  solemn  memento  to 
the  youthful  aspirant  for  political  fame  and  power.  He 
may  see  in  Mr.  Burr,  a  young  man  born  of  wealthy  pa- 
rents, of  high  character  for  virtue  and  talents,  com- 
mencing life  with  the  advantage  of  an  accomplished  and 
finished  education  and  the  most  fascinating  address;  at  one 
period  the  idol  of  a  great  political  party,  and  in  the  year 
1800,  second  in  influence  and  popularity  only  to  one  man 
in  America;  in  1812,  we  see  the  same  individual,  bank- 
rupt in  fortune  and  reputation,  who,  having  wandered  for 
years  among  various  nations  in  Europe,  had  returned  to 
his  native  land,  detested  as  a  traitor  to  his  country,  and 
shunned  with  horror  by  all  good  men  as  a  murderer. 

Will  not  the  ingenuous  mind,  in  view  of  such  a  career, 
be  forced  to  the  conclusion,  that  although  the  mere  poli- 
tician may  extol  the  tact  and  address,  and  management  of 
a  partisan  leader,  the  continued  support  of  the  great  mass 
of  the  American  people,  can  only  be  obtained  by  afford- 
ing evidence  of  honesty  and  integrity  of  purpose,  and 
that  virtue  and  patriotism  alone  are  safe  and  certain  pass- 
ports to  power  and  glory. 

It  has  been  remarked,  that  the  war  between  France  and 
the  other  European  powers,  had  occasioned  a  great  de- 
mand for  the  bread  stuffs  produced  by  the  grain  growing 
states,  which  had  raised  the  price  of  produce  in  this  coun- 
try to  an  amount  before  unequalled;  that  as  the  Ameri- 
cans occupied  a  neutral  position,  their  vessels  navigated 
freely  the  ocean,  and  that  thus  a  considerable  portion  of 
the  carrying  trade  of  the  belligerents,  and  particularly  of 
France,  was  engrossed  by  American  ship  owners.  The 
strength  of  the  British  on  the  ocean  rendered  that  nation 
less  dependent  than  France  on  this  country  for  carrying 
on  its  transportation.  The  British  were  also  desirous  of 
compelling  the  French  to  transport  their  own  supplies 
and  goods  in  their  own  vessels,  because  the  French  vessels 


260  POLITICAL    HISTOHY  [1807. 

when  on  the  high  seas,  in  all  human  probability,  would 
many  of  them  be  captured  by  the  British  privateers,  and 
vessels  of  war.  For  this  reason,  and  with  a  view  to  cur- 
tail the  neutral  trade  of  the  United  States,  the  English 
government  adopted  orders  in  council,  tending  to  check 
and  in  a  manner  suppress  all  intercourse  between  America 
and  France.  This  state  of  things  bore  hard,  not  only  upon 
America  but  France,  by  depriving  that  nation  of  supplies 
for  its  army.  The  French  therefore  adopted  decrees 
which  rendered  American  vessels  liable  to  seizure  and 
condemnation  when  carrying  on  what  had  heretofore  been 
a  lawful  trade  with  Great  Britain.  The  American  go- 
vernment remonstrated  against  these  orders  and  decrees 
without  effect,  and  under  the  impression  that  neither  Eng- 
land nor  France  could  dispense  with  the  use  of  our  pro- 
ductions, Mr.  Jefferson  recommended  an  embargo  on  all 
American  shipping,  until  one  or  both  the  belligerents 
should  acknowledge  our  neutral  rights  by  a  repeal  of  their 
obnoxious  orders  and  decrees.  Congress  adopted  the  re- 
commendation by  passing  a  law  in  accordance  with  it. 
The  embargo  bore  hard  on  the  northern  and  middle  states, 
and  particularly  on  the  state  of  New- York. 

It  was  contended  that  other  and  more  efficient  measures 
less  injurious  to  the  nation,  and  especially  to  the  grain 
growing  and  commercial  states,  than  a  resort  to  an  em- 
bargo for  an  indefinite  period  of  time,  might  have  been 
adopted.  Shortly  after  the  passage  of  this  act  by  con- 
gress, a  public  meeting  was  held  in  the  city  of  New- York, 
of  which  De  Witt  Clinton  was  chairman,  and  James 
Townsencl  was  secretary,  which  adopted  resolutions  dis- 
approving of  the  embargo;  and  Mr.  Cheetham,  in  the 
American  Citizen,  the  Clintonian  paper,  came  out  decided- 
ly against  the  measure.  The  federalists  to  a  man  de- 
nounced, with  great  bitterness,  the  restrictive  measures  as 
ruinous  to  the  country.     The  republicans,  however,  gene- 


1808.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  261 

rally  expressed  their  approbation  of  the  embargo,  and  it 
was  not  long  before  the  principal  and  almost  the  sole 
topic  of  dispute  between  the  two  parties,  was  the  question 
as  to  the  propriety  and  fitness  of  this  measure,  with  which 
was  connected  a  dispute  whether  the  British  orders  in 
council  were  provoked  by  the  French,  or  whether  the 
French  decrees  were  not  in  some  degree  excusable  as  a 
retaliatory  measure  to  the  English  orders  in  council.  The 
federalists  advocated  the  first  position,  and  the  latter  was 
contended  for  by  the  republicans. 

While  these  national  questions  agitated  the  public  mind, 
the  legislature  convened  at  Albany.  Doct.  Alexander 
Sheldon  was  again  elected  speaker,  and  Daniel  Rodman 
clerk,  Rodman,  the  republican  candidate,  received  sixty 
votes,  and  Mr.  G.  Y.  Lansing,  the  former  clerk,  twenty- 
one.  This  vote  may  be  considered  as  evidence  of  the 
strength  of  parties  in  the  assembly. 

The  speech  of  the  new  governor  was  well  written.  It 
presented  a  succinct  and  clear  view  of  the  controversy 
between  the  American  government  and  the  belligerents  of 
Europe,  and  decidedly  approved  of  the  embargo  as  the 
most  safe  and  efficient  means  of  causing  both  the  English 
and  French  to  respect  our  national  rights. 

In  the  assembly,  when  discussing  the  answer  of  that 
body  to  the  governor's  speech,  upon  that  part  of  it  which 
advocated  the  embargo  laws,  a  warm  debate  ensued,  but 
in  accordance  with  the  views  of  the  governor,  was  adopt- 
ed by  a  vote  of  sixty-two  to  twenty-two. 

On  the  first  day  of  February,  the  assembly  made  choice 
of  a  council  of  appointment,  consisting  of  Benjamin  Coe 
from  the  southern,  Peter  C.  Adams  from  the  middle,  Johr 
Veeder  from    the  eastern,  and  Nathan  Smith  of  the  west 
ern  districts. 

The  council  immediately  proceeded  to  the  work  for 
•which  they  were  created.     They   removed  Dr.  Tillotson 


262  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1808. 

from  the  office  of  secretary  of  state,  and  appointed  Elisha 
Jenkins.  They  restored  Mr.  Clinton  to  the  Mayoralty  of 
New- York;  they  removed  Maturin  Livingston  from  the 
office  of  recorder,  and  appointed  P.  C,  Van  Wyck  to  that 
office.  Sylvanus  Miller,  who  had  been  by  Gov.  Lewis  re- 
moved from  the  office  of  surrogate  of  New-York  to  make 
place  for  Ogden  Edwards,  was  restored  to  his  former 
place,  and  eleven  other  removals  and  appointments  were 
made  on  the  same  day. 

By  the  election  of  Mr.  Tompkins  to  the  office  of  go 
vernor,  another  vacancy  was  caused  on  the  bench  of  the 
supreme  court,  and  to  fill  that  vacancy  Joseph  C.  Yates 
was  appointed.  This  appointment  occasioned  some  sur- 
prise to  the  members  of  the  bar.  Though  perfectly  amia- 
ble as  a  citizen,  Judge  Yates  was  not  much  known  as  a 
lawyer.  This  appointment  was  said  to  have  been  pro- 
cured principally  by,  the  influence  of  the  country  members 
of  the  legislature,  among  w^hom  he  was  much  esteemed, 
and  especially  by  Mr.  Veeder,  who  was  a  member  of  the 
council  and  his  warm  and  personal  friend.  Mr.  Clinton 
was  almost  the  only  prominent  man  who  advocated  his 
appointment.  Mr.  Woodworth,  although  he  had  from  his 
boyhood  been  a  zealous  republican,  was,  because  he  sup- 
ported Gov.  Lew'is,  within  a  few  days  after  the  first  or- 
ganization of  the  council,  removed  from  the  office  of  at- 
torney general,  and  Matthias  B.  Hildreth  of  Johnstown, 
appointed  in  his  place. 

I  observe  from  the  minutes  of  the  council  that  on  the 
18th  of  March,  John  W.  Taylor  and  Sajniuel  Young,  men 
who  have  since  made  a  distinguished  figure  in  political  life, 
were  appointed  justices  of  the  peace  for  the  town  of 
Ballston  in  Saratoga,  and  that  on  the  20th  of  the  same 
month  Martin  Van  Buren,  who  has  been  still  more  dis- 
tinguished, was  appointed  surrogate  of  the  county  of  Co- 


# 


1808.]  OF    NEW-YORK  263 

lumbia.     These,  I   presume,  were  the  first   civil   offices 
held  by  these  gentlemen. 

This  council  proceeded  to  send  new  general  commis- 
sions of  the  peace  into  many  of  the  counties,  and  in  the 
course  of  a  few  months  brought  about  almost  an  entire 
change  of  persons  holding  civil  offices  in  the  state.  Such 
was  the  power  of  this  strange,  and  formidable  machine 
called  the  council  of  appointment. 

The  legislature  seems  to  have  been  effectually  imbued 
with  the  same  spirit  which  governed  the  council.  There 
was  one  state  office,  and  only  one,  over  whose  tenure 
the  constitution  gave  them  control.  It  was  the  treasurer. 
That  office  was  then  held  by  Abraham  G,  Lansing,  an  up- 
right, responsible  and  capable  man.  Him  the  legislature 
promptly  removed,  and  appointed  David  Thomas,  late  a 
member  of  congress  from  Washington  county,  in  his 
place. 

Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton,  shortly  before  or  after  his  arrival 
in  Albany,  renounced  his  opposition  to  the  embargo  laws, 
and  professed  his  approbation  of  the  measures  of  the 
general  administration.  For  this  he  was  severely  abused 
by  the  federalists,  and  by  his  quondam  friend  Mr.  Cheet- 
ham,  who  persisted  as  editor  of  the  American  Citizen,  in 
his  opposition,  and  charged  Mr.  Clinton  with  bad  faith,  in 
persuading  him  to  take  the  stand  he  had  taken  on  the 
question,  and  then  of  abandoning  him.  I  can  perceive  no 
just  cause  for  this  abuse.  The  embargo  presented  a  great 
question  of  national  policy,  of  which  Mr.  Clinton  at  first 
formed  an  unfavorable  opinion,  but  upon  more  reflection, 
he  judged  differently.  Had  he  not  a  right,  and  was  it  not 
his  duty,  thus  to  do  1  Having  changed  his  opinion  on 
the  subject,  as  an  honest  man,  he  was  bound  to  act  accord- 
ing to  the  convictions  of  his  own  conscience. 

The  second  term  of  Mr.  Jefferson  as  president  of  the 
United  States,  would  expire  on  the  3d   of  March,  1809, 


264  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1808. 

and  a  new  president  was  to  be  elected  in  December,  1808. 
It  was  the  fashion  of  the  day  to  designate  the  candidate 
for  president  by  a  congressional  caucus;  and  James  Madi- 
son was  nominated  by  such  caucus.  This  nomination 
gave  offence  to  the  vice-president,  George  Clinton,  and  his 
friends.  George  Clinton  was  by  the  same  caucus  again 
nominated  for  vice-president. 

Seventeen  republican  members  of  congress  protested 
against  this  nomination.  Some  of  the  protestors  were 
from  the  state  of  New- York,  among  whom  were  John 
Russel,  Josiah  Masters,  George  Clinton,  Jr.,  brother  to 
De  Witt,  and  Peter  Swart. 

The  Albany  Register,  at  that  time  conducted  by  Mr- 
Southwick,  who  acted  in  every  thing  in  concert  with  De 
Witt  Clinton,  declared  its  confidence  in  Mr.  Madison,  but 
at  the  same  time  expressed  an  opinion  that  the  presidency 
was  due  to  the  vice-president,  Mr.  Clinton.  On  the  5th 
of  March,  the  vice-president  wrote  from  Washington  to  a 
friend  in  Albany,  probably  De  Witt  Clinton,  no  doubt 
with  a  view  that  his  letter  should  be  published,  stating 
that  he  was  not  consulted  about  the  nomination,  and  had 
neither  refused  or  consented  to  be  a  candidate.  He  did 
not,  he  said,  even  know  of  the  caucus  till  the  day  on  the 
evening  of  which  it  was  held,  when  he  accidentally 
saw  a  notice  signed  by  Stephen  Roe  Bradley,  summon- 
ing one  of  the  members  to  attend.  I  observe  that  the 
Albany  Register,  shortly  afterwards,  (25th  of  March,) 
spoke  with  some  bitterness  of  the  policy  of  Virginia,  and 
charged  the  Virginians  with  cherishing  an  opinion  that  no 
one  out  of  that  state  was  fit  for  the  first  office  in  the 
nation. 

On  the  other  hand,  so  early  as  the  winter  of  1806, 1 
observe  an  article  copied  from  the  Richmond  Enquirer 
mto  the  Evening  Post,  describing  the  enormous  power 
-yielded  by  De  Witt  Clinton  in  this  state,  and  alluding  to 


1S08.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  265 

the  fact  that,  besides  being  a  senator  and  member  of  the 
council  of  appointment,  he  held  the  office  of  mayor  of 
New-York,  which  it  alleged  was  worth  twelve  thousand 
dollars  a  year.  I  mention  these  circumstances,  to  show 
the  origin  of  the  jealousies  and  the  eventual  hostility 
between  Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  and  the  Virginia  dynasty, 
as  it  was  afterwards  called. 

The  legislature  adjourned  on  the  11th  of  April,  but  be- 
fore separating,  the  republican  members  signed  an  address, 
in  which  they  justified  the  measures  of  the  administration, 
and  urged  its  support.  The  address  was  signed  by  eighty- 
nine  members. 

The  effect  of  the  embargo,  among  other  things,  was  to 
reduce  the  price  of  wheat  from  two  dollars  to  seventy- 
five  cents  per  bushel.  This  roused  the  attention  of  the 
people,  and  they  listened  with  eagerness  to  the  arguments 
of  the  federalists.  That  party  rallied  with  great  vigor  in 
almost  every  county  in  the  state,  and  obtained  a  considera- 
ble accession  of  strength  in  the  assembly,  but  the  repub- 
lican party  still  retained  a  majority  in  that  house.  From 
the  eastern  district,  David  Hopkins,  a  federalist  was  elect- 
ed, and  from  the  middle,  Edward  P.  Livingston,  a  Lewisite, 
was  chosen.  Benjamin  Coe  and  William  W.  Gilbert, 
from  the  southern,  and  Luther  Rich,  Francis  Bloodgood, 
Sylvanus  Smally,  Walter  Martin  and  Silas  Halsey  from 
the  western  districts,  all  republicans,  were  this  year  elect- 
ed to  the  senate. 


266  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1808. 

CHAPTER   XIII. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1903,  TO  MAY  1,  1809. 

John  Quincy  Adams,  who  had  been  elected  a  senator 
of  the  United  States,  by  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts, 
a  majority  of  whom  were  federalists,  and  of  course  were 
opposed  to  the  embargo  law,  in  the  winter  of  1808,  had 
addressed  a  letter  to  Harrison  Gray  Otis,  in  which  he  de- 
clared himself  in  favor  of  that  measure,  and  set  forth  at 
large  his  reasons  for  supporting  it.  This  letter  was 
republished  in  all  the  principal  democratic  newspapers 
in  the  state  of  New- York;  and,  as  it  was  written  with 
great  ability,  and  the  standing  and  character  of  the  wri- 
ter entitled  him  to  much  respect,  it  had  a  considerable 
influence  on  the  public  mind.  Still,  however,  a  large 
majority  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts  were  warmly 
opposed  to  the  embargo  laws,  and  Mr.  Adams,  under  these 
circumstances,  thought  it  his  duty  to  give  back  to  the  le- 
gislature the  power  with  w^hich  they  had  invested  him, 
inasmuch  as  a  question  had  arisen,  subsequent  to  his  elec- 
tion, in  which  he  could  not,  in  conscience,  carry  into  ef- 
fect the  wall  of  his  constituents.  He,  therefore,  on  the 
eighth  of  June,  resigned  his  place  in  the  United  States 
senate,  in  order  to  afford  the  legislature  an  opportunity  of 
choosing  a  representative  whose  political  principles  ac- 
corded with  the  majority  of  that  body. 

The  Livingstons,  and  a  majority  of  the  prominent  re 
publican  friends  of  Gov.  Lewis,  as  well  as  Mr.  Lewis 
himself,  in  connection  with  Col.  Swartwout,  M.  L.  Davis, 
and  other  leading  Burrites  in  New-York,  came  out  in 
support  of  the  general  administration,  and  they  particulariy 
TQanifested  their  zeal  in  behalf  of  Mr.    Madison  as  the 


1808.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  267 

next  candidate  for  the  presidency.  In  their  anxiety  to 
sustain  Mr.  Madison,  they  assailed  Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton, 
charging  him  with  hypocrisy  in  professions  of  approbation 
of  the  embargo  law,  and  with  direct  hostility  to  the  elec- 
tion of  Mr.  Madison.  In  this  they  were  sustained  by 
several  leading  newspapers  in  other  states.  A  newspaper 
printed  at  Washington,  called  the  "  Washington  Monitor," 
edited  by  Mr.  Colvin,  a  clerk  in  the  office  of  the  secretary 
of  state,  (Mr.  Madison  being  then  secretary,)  a  man  of 
talents,  but  extremely  lax  in  his  moral  principles,  and 
irregular  in  his  habits,  enlisted,  with  the  most  asperity,  in 
this  warfare.  These  editors,  in  their  animadversions  and 
strictures,  did  not  confine  their  attacks  to  De  Witt  Clinton, 
but  extended  their  denunciations  to  the  venerable  vice- 
president  and  Judge  Spencer.  The  appointments,  too, 
which  were  made  by  the  general  government,  began  to 
assume  an  aspect  of  preference  to  those  Burrites  and  Lew- 
isites, in  New- York,  who  were  known  to  be  personally 
hostile  to  Mr.  Clinton. 

John  Barber,  the  proprietor  and  editor  of  the  Albany 
Register,  died  on  the  15th  July,  and  the  sole  management 
of  that  paper  then  devolved  upon  Solomon  Southwick, 
which  greatly  added  to  the  influence  which  the  personal 
address  and  zeal  of  that  gentleman  had  before  given  him, 
in  the  republican  party.  Mr.  Barber,  as  a  correct  and 
virtuous  citizen,  was  highly  esteemed,  and  his  death  was 
deeply  lamented. 

The  fall  elections  afforded  evidence  of  the  increase  of 
federal  strength  in  the  New-England  states.  The  state  of 
Vermont  elected  a  federal  governor,  and  a  majority  of 
federalists  in  the  legislature. 

The  New-York  legislature  met  on  the  first  of  November, 
for  the  purpose  of  choosing  presidential  electors. 

Doct.  Sheldon  having  been  beaten  at  the  election  in 
April,  the  federalists  having  obtained  a  majority  in  Mont- 


268  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1808. 

gomery  county.  Gen.  James  W.  Wilkin  of  Orange  county, 
was  chosen  speaker,  in  opposition  to  Mr.  Van  Rensselaer, 
the  federal  candidate.  The  result  of  the  ballot  was,  for 
Wilkin,  sixty,  for  Van  Rensselaer,  forty-five.  This  vote 
may  be  considered  as  an  evidence  of  the  strength  of  par- 
ties in  the  assembly. 

The  governor's  speech  did  not  contain  any  thing  which 
particularly  requires  notice.  He  reiterated  his  approba- 
tion of  the  general  administration,  and  again  urged  a  sup- 
port of  its  measures. 

A  considerable  portion  of  the  democratic  party,  were 
for  giving  the  vote  of  the  state  to  George  Clinton  for  the 
office  of  president;  others  insisted  that  such  a  step  would 
be  unwise,  if  not  positively  wrong;  that  it  would  exhibit 
division  in  the  ranks  of  the  republicans  in  the  nation  j 
would  excite  jealousy  and  unkind  feelings  among  the  re- 
publican friends  of  Mr.  Madison,  and  ultimately  impair 
the  just  influence  of  the  republicans  of  this  state  with  their 
brethren  in  other  states;  while  a  vote  for  Mr.  Clinton 
would  be  of  no  possible  use  to  him,  as  it  was  morally 
certain  Mr.  Madison  would  be  elected.  It  was,  it  would 
seem,  finally  agreed  that  the  electors  should  be  chosen 
without  reference  to  their  opinions  on  this  question,  leav- 
ing it  to  them  to  cast  their  votes  either  for  Mr.  Madison 
or  George  Clinton,  as  they  might  think  expedient. 

Ambrose  Spencer  and  Henry  Huntington  headed  the 
electoral  ticket  which  was  nominated  and  elected.  Even- 
tually six  of  the  electors  of  this  state,  voted  for  George 
Clinton  for  president,  and  the  residue  for  Mr.  Madison. 

The  result  of  the  presidential  vote  in  the  nation  for 
president,  was,  for  James  Madison,  one  hundred  and 
twenty-two  votes;  Charles  C.  Pinckney,  forty-eight  j 
George  Clinton,  six.  For  vice-president,  George  Clinton 
received  one  hundred  and   thirteen  votes;  Rufus   King, 


1808.]  OF    NEW-YORK,  269 

forty-eight;  John  Langdon,  nine;*  James  Madison,  three;t 
James  Monroe,  three. f 

The  legislature,  after  choosing  electors,  adjourned, 
without  attempting  to  transact  any  other  business  of  im- 
portance. 

From  the  moment  when  it  was  known  that  Gov.  Tomp- 
kins had  been  elected,  the  Lewisites  and  Burrites  had 
prosecuted  a  very  vigorous  personal  opposition  to  Mr. 
Clinton.  The  dissatisfaction  of  the  vice-president  with 
the  nomination  of  Mr.  Madison  for  the  office  of  president; 
the  inclination  manifested  by  many  of  Mr.  Clinton's  friends 
in  this  state,  to  support  Mr.  Geo.  Clinton,  in  opposition 
to  the  caucus  nomination;  and  the  disapprobation  of  the 
embargo  laws,  early  manifested  by  Mr.  Clinton,  and  in- 
deed by  the  vice-president,!  gave  color  to  that  opinion. 
But  their  most  effectual  means  of  recruiting  their  force 
and  increasing  their  strength,  was  from  the  disappointed 
office  seekers.  Every  man  who  failed  in  getting  an  ap- 
pointment for  which  he  was  an  applicant,  was  instructed 
to  charge  his  defeat  to  Mr.  Clinton,  and  as  the  applicant 
for  office  is  always  the  last  man  to  impute  his  ill  success 
to  his  own  unfitness,  this  advice  was  generally  followed, 
while  the  persons  who  were  so  fortunate  as  to  obtain  ap- 
pointments, were  taught  that  they  owed  their  success  to 
Gov.  Tompkins. 

Tompkins  himself  professed  to  have  nothing  to  do  with 

•  The  votes  of  New-Hampshire. 

t  The  votes  of  New-York. 

I  la  the  winter  of  1803,  Mr.  Charles  R.  Webster  published,  in  the  Albany  Ga- 
2ette,  a  statement  of  an  interview  between  him  and  Wm.  Dunning,  a  democratic 
senator  from  the  middle  district,  substantially  alleging  that  he,  (Dunning,)  had 
received  a  letter  from  the  vice-president  disapproving  of  the  embargo.  To  this, 
Mr.  Dunning  interposed  an  evasive  denial;  but  he  declined  stating  what  the  con- 
versation was,  as  he  insisted  that  it  was  confidential.  He  says  Mr.  Webster  did 
not  see  the  vice-president's  letter,  but  he  does  not  publish  the  letter,  or  pretend 
to  state  what  it  contained.  From  the  statement  it  is  fair  to  infer  that  the  vice- 
president  did,  in  a  letter  to  Mr.  Dunning,  express  himself  unfavorable  to  the  em- 
bargo laws. 


270  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1808. 

this  personal  warfare;  indeed,  he  claimed  to  be  the  per- 
sonal as  well  as  political  friend  of  Mr.  Clinton;  but  the 
circumstance  that  Mr.  Mangle  Minthorne,  the  father-in-law 
of  the  governor,  and  a  wealthy  citizen  of  New-York,  was 
a  leader  in  these  attacks,  and  generally  chairman  of  the 
meetings  of  the  Martling  men,  as  Mr.  Clinton's  opponents 
were  called,  induced  considerable  suspicion  that  Mr.  Tomp- 
kins secretly  encouraged  these  assaults,  which  now  evi- 
dently appeared  to  be  the  result  of  a  regular  system,  or 
plot,  which  had  for  its  object  the  political  prostration  of 
Mr.  Clinton. 

A  little  before  the  winter  session  of  the  legislature,  a 
public  meeting  of  the  friends  of  the  national  administration 
was  notified  to  be  held  in  the  city  of  New-York.  In 
order  to  create  jealousy  in  the  minds  of  the  republican 
members  of  the  legislature,  then  about  to  convene,  and  to 
impair  the  influence  of  Mr.  Clinton  among  them,  the  fol- 
lowing article  appeared  in  a  paper  which  was  the  organ 
of  Mr.  Clinton's  opponents  in  New-York,  called  the  Pub- 
lic Advertiser: — 

«  A  CAUTION  AGAINST  SURPRISE." 

"  An  abominable  intrigue  is  said  to  be  in  contemplation 
to  place  Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  in  the  chair  of  the  intended 
republican  meeting. 

"  A  measure  so  obnoxious  to  the  republicans  would  de- 
stroy the  harmony  of  the  meeting.  If  De  Witt  Clinton 
should  be  offered,  he  will  be  opposed  and  rejected  with 
disdain. 

"  There  can  be  no  possible  objection  to  Mr.  Clinton's 
supporting  the  general  government,  provided  he  has  re- 
nounced his  errors:  but  he  must  inspire  more  confidence 
before  he  can  expect  to  attain  the  honorable  station  of  a 
republican  chairman. 

"  A  more  uniform  character  ought  to  be  selected.  Be- 
fore  Mr.    Clinton    is   received,   he    must   unequivocally 


1809.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  271 

renounce  his  connection  with  Cheetham,  Masters,  Mum- 
ford  and  Van  Cortlandt.* 

"  It  is  hoped  there  is  not  a  member  of  the  general 
committee  that  will,  for  a  moment,  think  of  a  measure 
which  would  be  decisively  opposed,  and  viewed  as  an 
insult  to  the  public  understanding. 

"  Let  it  be  remembered  that  Mr.  Clinton  officiated  as 
the  chairman  of  a  general  meeting  which  censured  the 
conduct  of  James  Cheetham;  that  his  consenting  to  serve, 
appears  to  have  been  a  mere  cover,  for  since  that  period 
he  has  been  as  intimate  with  Cheetham  as  he  ever  was. 

"  Republican  proceedings  should  be  open,  frank  and 
dignified.  The  people  cannot  be  deceived  by  the  little 
tricks  and  stratagems  of  petit  politicians.  Beware  of 
intrigues." 

I  find  the  above  extract  copied  into  the  Register  of  the 
24th  January,  1809.  The  Register  characterises  the  arti- 
cle in  the  Advertiser  as  a  base  libel.  It  says  that  the 
Advertiser,  when  the  article  was  penned,  knew  that  it  was 
impossible  that  Mr.  Clinton  could  be  chairman  of  the 
meeting  referred  to,  because  it  was  publicly  known  that 
he  was  to  leave  New-York  for  Albany,  in  order  to  take  his 
seat  in  the  senate,  before  the  day  appointed  for  the  meet- 
ing in  New-York. 

The  adjourned  legislature  met  on  the  27th  of  January. 

Four  days  after  the  session  commenced,  (Jan.  31,)  Mr. 
Clinton,  probably  partly  with  a  view  to  disprove  the 
allegations  of  the  Martling  men  that  he  was  opposed  to 
the  republican  party  in  the  nation,  brought  into  the  senate 
a  series  of  resolutions,  approving  of  the  general  adminis- 
tration, and  pledging  the  state  for  its  support. 

These  resolutions,  upon  their  introduction,  were  sup- 
ported by  Mr.  Clinton  by  an  elaborate  and  able  speech. 

•  Messrs.  Mumford,  Masters  and  Van  Cortland,  were  members  of  congress  who 
voted  against  (he  embargo,  and  also  protesters  against  the  nommation  of  Madisoo. 


272  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1909. 

He  reviewed  the  controversy  between  this  country  and 
the  European  belligerents,  and  he  showed  that  America 
could  not,  consistent  with  her  independence  and  dignity 
as  a  nation,  any  longer  submit  to  a  violation  of  our  neu- 
tral rights.  He  traced  the  causes  of  the  difficulties  to  the 
mal-conduct  of  Great  Britain,  and  he  insisted  that  the 
embargo  and  non-intercourse  laws  were  the  safest  and 
most  proper  measures  to  which,  under  the  circumstances, 
the  government  could  resort.  He  condemned  the  violent 
opposition  of  Massachusetts  and  the  other  eastern  states, 
to  the  embargo  lawsj  he  deprecated  the  measures  which 
the  federalists  in  that  quarter  were  pursuing,  as  tending 
to  a  division  of  the  union;  and  it  was  on  this  occasion, 
that  he  made,  as  applicable  to  the  governing  principle  of 
the  eastern  federalists,  his  celebrated  quotation  from  Mil- 
ton— 

"  Better  to  reign  in  HeU,  than  serve  in  Heafen." 

In  the  assembly,  counter  resolutions  condemnatory  of 
the  embargo  and  of  the  whole  restrictive  system,  were, 
about  the  same  time,  introduced  by  the  federalists. 

In  that  body,  the  federalists  had  not  only  become 
respectable  as  to  numbers,  but  they  had  several  men 
deservedly  distinguished  for  their  talents.  Abraham 
Van  Vechten  was  a  member  from  the  county  of  Alba- 
ny. The  great  talents  and  high  standing  of  Mr.  Van 
Vechten  are  too  well  known  to  require  any  description, 
and  the  same  remark  is  applicable  to  Daniel  Cady,  a 
member  from  Montgomery  county,  who  is  still  living. 
The  latter  gentleman  has  devoted  an  unusually  long  pro- 
fessional life  to  the  practice  of  law,  and  has  acquired  a 
reputation,  as  a  lawyer,  of  inestimable  value.  He  never 
suffered  political  pursuits  for  one  moment  to  divert  him 
from  the  industrious  and  faithful  discharge  of  his  profes- 
sional duties. 

Mr.  Jacob  Rutsen  Van  Rensselaer,  from  the  county  of 


1809.1  OF   NEW-YOKK.  273 

Columbia,  was  also  a  member  of  the  same  assembly.  Mr. 
Van  Rensselaer  was  not  so  distinguished  in  his  profession, 
(he  was  bred  a  lawyer,)  as  the  other  two  gentlemen,  but 
he  was  a  man  of  talents,  and  a  bold,  active,  and  most 
zealous  politician.  Under  the  lead  of  these  gentlemen,  a 
furious  war  was  carried  on  against  the  political  majority 
in  the  state,  and  against  the  general  administration.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  republican  side  of  the  question  was 
well  and  ably  sustained,  in  the  assembly,  by  Nathan  San- 
ford,  afterwards  chancellor,  Roger  Skinner,  afterwards 
United  States  judge,  Obadiah  German,  D.  L.  Van  Ant- 
werp, and  others. 

The  resolutions  condemnatory  of  the  embargo,  and  the 
measures  of  the  administration  generally,  were  eventually 
rejected,  and  those  introduced  by  Mr.  Clinton  were  adopted 
by  both  houses:  in  the  senate,  without  a  division,  and  in 
the  assembly  by  a  vote  of  sixty-one  to  forty-one. 

A  council  of  appointment  was  chosen  on  the  30th  of 
January.  The  senators  elected,  were  Jonathan  Ward  of 
the  southern  district,  James  G.  Graham  of  the  middle, 
Isaac  Kellogg  of  the  eastern,  and  Alexander  Rhaeof  the 
western.  No  important  appointments  were  made  this 
year. 

Solomon  Southwick  was  made  sheriff  of  the  city  and 
county  of  Albany.  At  that  time  Mr.  Southwick's  popu- 
larity and  influence  were  sufficient  to  command  almost  any 
office  within  the  gift  of  the  republican  party. 

The  voluntary  suspension,  by  the  act  of  the  government, 
of  the  exportation  of  the  surplus  produce  of  the  country, 
by  the  embargo  and  non-intercourse  laws,  annoyed  and 
disturbed  the  ship  owner;  for  his  capital,  invested  in  ships, 
was  rapidly  wasting  by  the  decay  and  rotting  of  his  ships 
in  port,  without  affording  him  one  cent  of  profit;  the  im- 
porting merchant  was  arrested  in  his  business,  because  the 
annihilation  of  the  exporting  business  deprived  him  of  all 

18 


274  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1809. 

means  of  remittance;  and  the  farmer  felt  grievously  the 
effects  of  the  restrictive  system  in  the  failure  of  any  de- 
mand for  his  productions,  and  in  the  very  great  reduction 
in  the  price  of  every  article,  which  could  be  sold  at  all,  in 
market. 

The  eastern  states  boldly  took  the  ground  that  an  em- 
bargo, for  an  unlimited  period  of  time,  veas  unconstitu- 
tional; inasmuch  as  the  constitution  merely  authorised 
congress  to  regulate  commerce,  but  an  indefinite  embargo 
v^ras  an  annihilation  of  it. 

In  addition  to  all  these  causes  of  complaint  against  the 
embargo  system,  there  was  another,  which  disgusted  some 
of  its  original  friends.  Such  was  the  extent  of  the  Ameri- 
can coasts,  and  so  numerous  were  our  ports,  that  it  was 
impossible  to  enforce  the  law.  Honest  men  obeyed  it, 
and  suffered  by  it;  but  the  knave  evaded  it,  and  pocketed 
large  profits  as  a  reward  for  his  temerity  in  violating  the 
laws  of  his  country.  It  was  said,  and  perhaps  justly 
said,  that  a  legislator  was  bound  to  know  whether  a  law 
could,  or  could  not,  be  executed  ;  that  he  merited  the 
condemnation  of  his  constituents,  when  he  enacted  a  law 
which  the  event  proved  could  not  be  executed  ;  and  that 
his  failing  to  foresee  the  event  was  an  evidence  of  his  in- 
capacity to  legislate. 

But  no  mere  argument  will  produce  an  effect  on  the 
people  like  actual,  palpable  pecuniary  loss.  The  mer- 
chant who  fails  in  business,  and  the  farmer,  the  pYice  of 
whose  wheat,  or  other  article,  sinks  on  his  hands  to  one- 
half  the  former  price,  are  extremely  apt  to  charge  on  the 
men  who  manage  the  affairs  of  the  government  their 
unwelcome  reverses  of  fortune.  They  readily  conclude 
tliat  a  change  of  men  can  scarcely  make  things  worse,  and 
may  make  them  better. 

Had  the  federalists  confined  their  opposition  to  the 
measures  adopted  by  government  to  repel  the  aggressions 


1S09.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  275 

of  the  European  belligerents  on  our  commerce:  that  is  to 
say,  the  embargo  and  non-intercourse  lawsj  it  seems  to 
me  they  must  have  carried  a  majority  of  the  American 
people;  but,  unfortunately  for  their  success,  they  continu- 
ally insisted  that  we  had  little  or  no  cause  of  complaint 
against  Great  Britain,  and  that  France  was  the  principal 
aggressor.  If,  then,  they  contended,  America  must  have 
a  war,  it  ought  to  be  a  war  with  the  French,  and  not  the 
British. 

This,  was  a  revival  of  the  old  coctest  of  1798,  and  of 
course,  roused  into  action  the  democratic  feeling  which 
operated  so  intensely  on  the  minds  of  men  during  that 
period.  Nay,  more,  it  was  calling  out  the  remnant  of 
revolutionary  feeling  which  then  existed.  Our  mothers 
had  taught  us  in  our  cradles  that  the  British  were  our  en- 
emies. It  was  difficult  for  the  most  adroit  politician  to 
teach  us  a  different  and  adverse  lesson. 

Still,  there  were  many  republicans  so  disgusted  with 
the  restrictive  measures,  that  they  abandoned  their  party. 
Some  respectable  Lewisites  and  Burrites  could  not  be 
induced  again  to  act  with  a  party,  who,  in  their  judgment, 
had,  without  any  cause,  opposed  the  election  of  their  fa- 
vorite gubernatorial  candidates;  and  there  were,  no  doubt, 
many  other  disappointed  applicants  for  office,  who,  from 
resentment,  or  from  having  lost  all  hope  of  participating 
in  the  spoils  with  the  ruling  party,  sought  a  change,  with 
the  certainty  that  no  change  could  make  their  situation 
worse,  but  that  a  revolution  of  parties  might  better  their 
condition. 

The  republican  party  were  by  no  means  inactive.  Pub- 
lic meetings  were  held,  and  the  most  vigorous  efforts  were 
made  to  sustain  the  national  and  state  administrations. 
Legislative  addresses,  of  both  parties,  were  drawn  and 
published,  and  circulated  in  every  part  of  the  state,  but 
the  election  finally  resulted  in  the  triumph  of  the  federal 


276  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1809. 

party — the  first  triumph  -whichj  as  a  party,  they  had 
achieved,  since  the  year  1799. 

In  the  assembly  the  federalists  obtained  a  majority,  and 
in  the  eastern  and  western  districts  federal  senators  were 
elected.  Israel  Carle  was  elected  from  the  southern, 
Samuel  Haight  and  Johannus  Bruyn  from  the  middle, 
Daniel  Parris  and  John  Stearns  from  the  eastern,  and  Jo- 
nas Piatt,  Seth  Phelps  and  Amos  Hall  from  the  western 
districts. 

The  result  of  the  vote  was  as  follows: — 

Districts.  Fed.  Blaj. 

Eastern, 534 

Western, 391 


Districts.  Rep.  Maj. 

Southern, 840 

Middle, 816 


1656  925 

From  this  statement  it  appears  that  the  republican  ma- 
jority of  freeholders,  in  the  state,  was,  but  seven  hundred 
and  thirty-one. 

Gen.  Obadiah  German  was,  during  the  session  of  1809, 
elected  senator  of  the  United  States,  as  the  successor  of 
Doct.  Mitchell.  His  election  was  not  anticipated.  John 
Tayler,  and  several  other  prominent  republicans,  were  spo- 
ken of  as  candidates,  but  the  western  part  of  the  state 
claimed  that  the  United  States  senator  should  be  taken 
from  that  quarter,  and  Gen.  German  had  deservedly  ac- 
quired much  influence  in  the  legislature,  having  been  for 
a  considerable  time  a  member.  Although  an  uneducated 
man,  he  was  distinguished  for  strong  and  vigorous  intel- 
lectual powers;  while  his  frank  and  independent  course, 
as  a  legislator,  secured  to  him  the  friendship  and  respect 
of  his  fellow  members.  Mr.  Clinton  was  said  to  have 
been  friendly  to  his  nomination  and  election. 


1809.1  OF   NEW-YORK.  JHl 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1809,  TO  MAY  1,  1810. 

The  chief  of  the  French  government  had  stipulated  that 
whenever  the  British  government  should  rescind  their 
orders  in  council,  as  respected  the  American  trade,  he 
would  revoke  his  Berlin  and  Milan  decrees;  and  in  the 
month  of  April,  Mr.  Erskine,  the  English  minister  at 
Washington,  had  entered  into  a  treaty  with  the  American 
government,  that  the  orders  in  council  should  be  repealed 
on  the  tenth  day  of  June  then  next. 

The  president  immediately  issued  a  proclamation  set- 
ing  forth  the  substance  of  the  treaty,  and  announcing  that 
the  embargo  and  other  restrictive  statutes  would  be  re- 
pealed, according  to  a  proviso  contained  in  those  acts,  on 
the  same  tenth  day  of  June. 

This  proclamation  was  received  with  great  joy  all  over 
America;  but  the  republican  party,  especially,  hailed  the 
news  with  triumph,  claiming  it  as  a  demonstration  of  the 
efficacy  of  the  embargo  laws,  which  the  federalists,  as  co- 
ercive measures,  had  so  bitterly  and  unsuccessfully  de- 
nounced. The  republicans,  with  great  confidence,  ascribed 
this  happy  (supposed)  termination  of  our  foreign  disputes 
to  the  firmness  and  wisdom  of  the  national  administration. 
But  the  news  did  not  arrive  in  time  to  have  much  effect  on 
the  April  election.  It  came  to  the  polls  in  the  town  where  I 
then  resided  and  now  reside,  which  is  but  fifty  miles  from 
Albany,  on  the  second  day  of  the  election,  directed  to  me 
in  a  hand  bill  form.  I  instantly  made  it  known,  but  the 
federalists  denied  its  truth,  and  charged  it  as  a  sheer  elec- 
tioneering trick.  The  same  course  was  taken  by  the  fede- 
ralists at  most  other  polls,  in  the  sta^e  where  the  news  ar- 


278  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1809. 

rived  before  the  election  terminated.  Many  federalists 
"were  undoubtedly  sincere  in  their  belief  that  the  procla- 
mation was  forged,  for  considerable  sums  of  money  were 
lost  by  bets  upon  its  genuineness. 

The  tenth  of  June  was  celebrated  in  most  of  the  cities 
and  counties  in  the  state,  as  a  day  of  triumph  of  the  re- 
publican party;  but  that  triumph  was  of  but  short  dura- 
tion, for  the  British  government  disavowed  the  authority 
of  Mr.  Erskine  to  enter  into  such  an  arrangement,  and 
peremptorily  refused  to  carry  into  eifect  the  stipulations 
of  their  minister,  by  a  repeal  or  even  the  slightest  modifi- 
cation of  the  orders  in  council. 

This  disavowal  was  received  by  the  American  govern- 
ment and  the  republican  party  in  general,  with  deep  in- 
dignation* and  they  charged,  in  no  measured  terms,  the 
British  cabinet  with  a  palpable  breach  of  public  and 
pledged  faith.  The  federalists  too,  were  much  mortified 
and  chagrined,  for  they  had  all  along  apologised  for  every 
act  of  Great  Britain,  but  in  this  instance  their  ingenuity 
was  severely  taxed  to  invent  an  excuse  for  the  conduct  of 
Great  Britain.  They  finally  settled  down  upon  the  plan 
of  charging  the  president  with  enteringinto  an  engagement 
with  Mr.  Erskine  with  a  full  knowledge  that  he  had  no 
power  to  make  it,  and  they  therefore  agreed  that  the  pre- 
sident and  not  the  British  government  was  culpable. 

The  federalists,  in  order  to  carry  on  the  war  with  more 
vigor,  induced  Mr.  Harry  Croswell,  a  gentleman  of  talents 
and  great  power  as  a  political  writer,  who  had  printed  and 
conducted  the  "  Balance"  at  Hudson  for  many  years, 
and  who  we  have  seen  was  indicted  for  a  libel  on  Mr. 
Jefferson,  to  remove  to  Albany  and  there  issue  a  party 
paper  entitled  the  "  Balance  and  New-York  Journal." 

In  the  city  of  New-York,  Mr.  Cheetham,  in  the  Ameri- 
can Citizen,  continuing  to  oppose  the  embargo,  that  paper 
declined,  and  in  fact  ceased  to  be  recognized  as  a  reoubli- 


1809.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  279 

can  paper.  To  supply  its  place,  Mr.  Charles  Holt,  who 
had  been  indicted  for  sedition  in  Connecticut  under  the  ad- 
ministration of  Mr.  Adams,  established  a  Clintonian  repub- 
lican paper  called  the  Columbian,  in  the  city  of  New- 
York. 

Newspapers  are  to  political  parties  in  this  country  what 
working  tools  are  to  the  operative  mechanic.  I  do.  not 
speak  this  intending  any  want  of  respect  for  party  editors. 
As  a  class  of  citizens  they  are  respectable,  and  many  of 
them  possess  talents  of  high  order.  I  merely  state  the. 
fact,  as  an  excuse  for  occupying  the  time  of  the  reader  in 
this  history  of  parties,  in  occasional  notices  of  newspapers 
and  their  editors. 

A  governor  was  to  be  elected  in  April,  1810,  and  the 
federalists  took  an  early  position  in  the  field.  On  the  5th 
of  January,  a  large  and  respectable  meeting  was  held  in 
Albany,  of  which  Abraham  Van  Vechten  was  chairman, 
and  at  which  Jonas  Piatt  was  nominated  for  governor. 
Mr.  Piatt  was  a  lawyer,  highly  respectable  for  talents, 
and  great  purity  of  character.  He  was  a  pioneer  in  the 
country  west  of  Albany,  for  although  Whitesborough,  his 
place  of  residence,  is  now  quite  in  the  interior,  and  rather 
easterly  of  the  centre  of  population  in  the  state,  in  1790, 
or  about  that  time,  when  Gen.  Piatt  established  himself 
there,  it  was  a  frontier  settlement.  He  had,  therefore, 
grown  up  and  grown  great  with  the  great  west.  Proba- 
bly the  hope  of  obtaining  a  strong  vote  in  the  old  western 
district,  which  until  the  last  election  had  been  considered 
the  stronghold  of  republicanism,  was  one  reason  for  the 
selection  of  a  candidate  residing  in  that  district,  and  the 
unexpected  success  of  Mr.  Piatt,  in  his  election  as  senator, 
was  proof  of  his  personal  popularity,  and  indicated  him 
as  the  most  suitable  candidate  residing  in  that  quarter,  for 
the  office  of  governor 


280  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1810. 

Nicholas  Fish  was  afterwards  nominated  as  the  federal 
candidate  for  lieutenant  governor. 

The  legislature  met  on  the  30th  of  January.  Gen. 
William  North,  of  Duansburgh,  was  the  federal  candidate 
for  speaker,  and  chosen  over  William  Livingston,  the 
democratic  candidate,  by  a  vote  of  fifty-seven  to  forty- 
three,  showing  a  federal  majority  in  the  assembly  of  four- 
teen. 

The  governor  in  his  speech  reviewed  the  controversy 
of  the  United  States  with  the  belligerents  of  Europe, 
pointed  out  the  injuries  which  this  country  had  sustained 
by  a  violation  of  its  neutral  rights,  and  justified  the  course 
pursued  by  the  general  administration.  He  spoke  favora- 
bly of  the  success  of  the  experiment  then  being  made  by 
domestic  manufacturies,  and  he  recommended  legislative 
encouragement  of  the  companies  engaged  in  them.  He 
urged  the  attention  of  the  legislature  to  the  common 
shool  fund,  and  he  concluded  by  recommending  harmony 
and  unanimity  of  action. 

When  parties  in  a  legislative  body  are  nearly  equally 
divided,  a  recommendation  of  unity  and  harmony  is  em- 
phatically "  words,  words,  words,"  and  nothing  else. 

The  assembly  forthwith  proceeded  to  the  choice  of  a 
council  of  appointment,  and  Israel  Carl  of  the  southern, 
Robert  Williams  of  the  middle,  Daniel  Parris  of  the  east- 
ern, and  Amos  Hall  of  the  western  districts  were  elected. 
Mr.  Parris  and  Gen.  Hall,  were  federalists,  but  Mr.  Wil- 
liams was  elected  to  the  senate  as  a  republican.  There 
was  not  at  that  time  a  single  federalist  in  the  senate  from 
either  the  southern  or  middle  districts.  Hence  the  ma- 
jority in  the  assembly  were  compelled  to  choose  senators, 
for  members  of  the  council  from  those  districts,  who 
were  elected  as  republicans.  Mr.  Carl  was  frank  and 
decided,  and  possessed  a  character  for  sincerity  and  firm- 
ness which  excluded  all  suspicion  that  he  would  swerve 


1810.1  OP    NEW-YORK  281 

from  an  honorable  republican,  course.     Not  so  with  Mr. 
Williams.     He   had   been   wavering   in  his  politics,  and 
had    alternately   been   a  Burrite,   Lewisite    and   Clinto- 
nian.     He  was,  in  fact,  suspected  to  be  a  political     huck- 
ster,his  subsequent  conduct  proved  him  to  be  such.     He 
had,  however,  carefully  concealed  his  intentions  from  the 
political  friends  with  whom  he  professed  to  act,  so  much 
so,  that  after  his  election  many  republicans  had  full  confi- 
dence that  he  would  be   true  to  their  interest;  but  upon 
the   first   meeting  of  the    council,  on  the  second  day  of 
February,  all   doubts  were  removed,  and  Mr.  Williams 
fully  exhibited  the  political  character  which  he  meant  there- 
after to  assume.  At  that  first  meeting,  the  attorney  general, 
secretary  of  state,  recorder  of  Albany,   mayor,  recorder, 
district   attorney   and   surrogate  of  New-York,  were  re- 
moved, and  Abraham  Van  Vechten  was  appointed  attor- 
ney general  J  Daniel   Hale,  secretary  of  state  j  Theodore 
V.    W.    Graham,   recorder   of   Albany;    Jacob    RadclifF, 
mayor   of  "New-York;  J.    O.    Hoffman,   recorder;  C.  D. 
Colden,  district   attorney,  and  John  W.  Mulligan,  surro- 
gate of  New- York.     The  surrogate  of  Dutchess  county, 
James  Talmadge,  was  removed,  and  Thomas  J.  Oakley,  the 
son-in-law  of  Mr.  Williams,  but  a  young  lawyer  of  high- 
ly respectable  talents  and  character,  was  appointed  in  his 
place.     Several  minor    removals  and  appointments  were 
also  made  this  day. 

The  indignation  of  the  republicans  against  Williams 
was  everywhere  intense,  but  in  no  part  of  the  state  was 
that  indignation  nearer  bursting  forth  into  open  outrage 
than  in  his  own  district.  The  very  friends  who  exerted 
their  influence,  employed  their  time  and  expended  their 
money  to  procure  his  election,  were  those  who,  by  his 
casting  vote,  were  ejected  from  oflicc — office  upon  the 
emoluments  of  which  some  of  them  depended  for  the  sup- 
port of  their  families.     He  was  stigmatized   as   a  traitor 


282  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1810. 

and  labeled  as  a  Judas  Iscariot.  Who  would  purchase 
short-lived  power  at  such  a  price?  Mr.  Williams,  though 
a  man  of  considerable  activityj  address  and  enterprise, 
after  he  ceased  to  be  a  member  of  the  council,  was  neglect- 
ed by  all  parties,  and  was  never  afterwards  heard  of  in 
political  life.  His  fate  should  operate  as  a  beacon  to 
young  politicians.  The  public  are  too  just  to  condemn 
any  individual  for  his  political  opinions,  provided  he  ex- 
presses them  frankly  and  supports  them  fairly.  It  is  con- 
cealment, hypocrisy  and  treachery,  which  are  in  politics 
the  unpardonable  sin,  a  sin  which  merits  and  generally 
receives  a  condemnation  which  is  perpetual. 

This  council  was  purely  federal,  unembarrassed  with 
the  scruples  or  timidity  which  crippled  the  action  of  the 
council  of  which  Lewis  was  president  in  1807.  It  was 
very  thorough,  and  as  a  Washington  newspaper  editor  at 
a  late  day  would  have  said,  "  searching'^  in  its  operations. 
Clerks  of  counties,  sheriffs,  district  attorneys,  judges  of 
courts  of  common  pleas,  surrogates,  and  justices  of  the 
peace,  were  generally  made  to  feel  its  power. 

The  assembly  very  properly  passed  a  bill  re-appointing 
Abraham  G.  Lansing  as  treasurer,  in  which  the  senate 
concurred. 

On  the  5th  of  February,  a  legislative  caucus  of  the  re- 
publican members  was  held,  at  which  Tompkins  and 
Broome  were  nominated  for  re-election.  The  address 
was  drawn  by  De  Witt  Clinton,  and  signed  by  all  the  repub- 
lican members  of  the  legislature,  and  several  citizens  who 
happened  to  be  in  attendance.  The  whole  number  of 
signers  of  the  address  was  one  hundred  and  thirty-six. 

The  answer  reported  in  the  assembly  to  the  governor's 
speech,  was  severe,  almost  to  indecorum.  It  attacked 
with  great  asperity  the  national  administration.  It  charged, 
that  we    had   more  cause  of  war  with  France  than  Great 


1810.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  283 

Britain,  and  that  the  government  had  not  pursued  an  im- 
partial course  towards  the  belligerentSi 

A  substitute  responsive  to  the  governor's  speech  was 
offered  by  Doct.  Mitchell  from  New-York.  An  able  and 
widely  extended  debate  ensued,  conducted  principally  on 
the  federal  side  by  Messrs.  Van  Vechten,  Cady  and 
Grosvenor.  The  gentleman  last  mentioned,  was  a  new 
member  from  Columbia  county,  who,  as  a  member  of  the 
New- York  legislature,  and  afterwards  as  a  member  of  con- 
gress, distinguished  himself  as  one  of  the  most  splendid 
orators  of  the  age.  His  life,  though  brilliant,  was  short. 
He  died  while  a  member  of  congress  in  1817. 

On  the  republican  side  of  the  house,  the  debate  was 
carried  on  principally  by  Doct.  Mitchell,  Roger  Skinner 
of  Washington  county,  D.  L.  Van  Antwerp  of  Schenec- 
tady, and  O.  P.  Comstock  of  Seneca  county,  a  son  of  the 
worthy  Adam  Comstock  of  Saratoga  county. 

I  happened  to  be  present  and  heard  the  speech  of  Doct. 
Mitchell.  His  argument  afforded  evidence  of  much  read- 
ing, considerable  ability,  and  great  benevolence  of  heart; 
and  yet  we  thought  it  smelt  of  the  shop,  for  in  speaking 
of  preparations  for  war,  and  the  resources  of  this  coun- 
try, he  had  occasion  to  state  that  an  abundance  of  salt 
petre  might  be  found  among  us.  This  led  him  to  give 
the  history  of  the  discovery  of  the  art  of  making  gun- 
powder, and  the  chemical  laws  which  governed  that  pro- 
cess, so  that  before  the  good  Doctor  was  aware  of  it,  he 
appeared  entirely  to  have  forgotten  the  orders  in  council, 
the  Berlin  and  Milan  decrees,  and  the  federal  and  republi- 
can parties,  and  was  transferred  to  his  chemical  laboratory, 
delivering  a  lecture  to  his  students  on  the  affinities  of 
bodies.  The  address,  as  reported  by  the  select  committee, 
was  finally  carried  by  a  vote  of  fifty-nine  to  forty-six. 

In  the  senate,  a  select  committee  had  reported  an  an- 
swer to  the  governor's  speech,  responsive  to  it,  for  which 


284  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1810. 

Gen.  Piatt  offered  a  substitute,  which  was  supported  by 
himself  and  Mr.  Parris,  with  considerable  ability.  They 
were  answered  by  Mr.  Clinton  and  Judge  Tayler.  The 
course  of  argument  pursued  by  Mr.  Clinton  and  Judge 
Tayler,  tended  to  charge  on  the  federalists  an  over  wean- 
ing attachment  to  Great  Britain,  and  indeed  they  accused 
them  with  taking  sides  with  the  British  against  their  own 
country.  I  heard  Mr.  Tayler's  speech,  and  in  the  course 
of  it,  or  rather  towards  the  close,  probably  in  order  to 
keep  alive  the  revolutionary  prejudices  against  the  British, 
he  gave  a  detailed  account  of  their  negotiations  with  the 
Indians,  about  the  time  of  the  commencement  of  the  war 
of  the  revolution,  and  which  resulted  in  an  agreement  be- 
tween the  parties,  that  the  Indians  should  become  the  al- 
lies of  the  British;  and  he  thence  charged  the  English 
with  being  responsible  for  the  depredations  and  murders 
committed  by  the  savages.  Mr.  Tayler  then  proceeded 
to  give  an  account  of  the  patriotic  services  and  great  sa- 
crifices and  sufferings  of  Mr.  Parris  the  father  of  the 
senator,  during  the  revolutionary  war,  and  finally  of  his 
treacherous  and  barbarous  murder  by  the  Indians.  "  And 
now,"  said  Mr.  Tayler,  "  I  am  surprised  and  grieved  to 
see  the  son  of  my  beloved  venerated  revolutionary  friend 
in  this  senate  pleading  the  British  cause." 

Mr.  Parris,  who  was  a  man  of  high  and  honorable  feel- 
ings, was  much  excited,  and  replied  with  great  asperity 
to  Mr.  Tayler. 

Judge  Tayler  was  a  man  of  great  tact  and  discernment, 
and  I  give  this  part  of  his  speech  to  show  the  kind  of  ar- 
gument resorted  to  and  the  feeling  called  out  in  this  poli- 
tical contest. 

The  substitute  of  Gen.  Piatt  was  rejected  in  the  senate 
by  a  vote  of  twenty-three  to  six. 

The  legislature  adjourned  on  the  6th  day  of  Apnij 
without  having  passed  any  important  general  laws. 


1810.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  285 

The  annual  election,  as  usual  when  a  governor  was  to 
be  elected,  was  sharply  contested;  but  the  circumstances 
under  which  this  election  was  held,  were  calculated  to 
call  into  action  an  uncommon  degree  of  zeal.  The  great 
question  as  to  the  merits  of  the  measures  of  the  national 
government,  was  of  immense  importance,  and  was  to 
be  passed  on  by  the  people,  but  this  was  not  all,  nor 
perhaps  so  much  the  immediate  cause  of  the  high  excite- 
ment, as  the  fact  that  the  federalists  had  just  got  a  taste 
of  the  loaves  and  fishes,  and  the  republicans  had  been 
recently  ejected.  Indeed,  it  was  a  life  and  death  ques- 
tion with  the  federalists.  If  they  could  elect  Gen.  Piatt, 
they  could  retain  the  power  of  which  they  had  had  barely 
time  to  taste.  If  Tompkins  should  be  elected  they  were 
prostrated  for  an  indefinite  period  of  time.  No  wonder 
then  they  struggled  as  it  were  for  life.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  republicans  had  been  recently  ejected  from  office, 
which  only  sharpened  their  appetite  for  power,  and  their 
zeal  in  the  contest  was  quickened  by  resentment  against 
the  party  who  had  overthrown  them.  Contrary  to  the 
expectations  of  both  parties,  the  republicans  were  not  only 
successful,  but  their  success  was  complete.  They  achiev- 
ed an  entire  and  complete  overthrow  of  their  opponents. 
Tompkins  was  re-elected  by  about  ten  thousand  majority 
The  republican  candidates  for  the  senate  succeeded  in  all 
the  four  districts,  and  in  the  assembly  the  republicans  had 
a  majority  of  almost  two  to  one.  The  only  gain  of  the 
federalists  in  the  assembly  was  in  the  city  of  New-York, 
where  the  election  was  very  close,  six  federalists  and  five 
republicans  having  been  elected  from  that  city. 

The  senators  elected  this  year  from  the  southern  dis- 
trict, were  Ebenezer  White;  from  the  middle,  James  W. 
Wilkin  and  Morgan  Lewis;  from  the  eastern,  Henry 
Yates,  Jr.;  from  the  western,  Nathan  Smith,  Reuben 
Humphrey,  Henry  ATownsend  and  Philetus  Swift. 


286  POLITICAL    HISTORY.  [1810. 

It  may  perhaps,  surprise  the  young  reader  to  be  inform- 
ed that  the  name  of  Gov.  Lewis  as  a  candidate  for  the 
legislature  was  on  the  same  ticket  that  contained  the  name 
of  Gov.  Tompkins,  and  that  the  same  party  w^hich  three 
years  before  opposed  the  election  of  Mr.  Lewis,  and  sup- 
ported his  more  successful  rival,  now  advocated  the  elec- 
tion of  both.     But  such  nevertheless  was  the  fact. 

Whether  Gov.  Lewis  from  his  own  reflection,  and  from 
the  persuasion  of  his  friends,  of  the  Livingston  family, 
had  been  induced  to  take  this  course  from  a  calculation 
that  this  was  the  best  means  of  regaining  political  power, 
or  whether,  although  he  did  "  hate  Tompkins  less,  he 
hated  Clinton  more,"  and  supposed  this  course  would  af- 
ford him  the  greatest  certainty  of  eventually  prostrating 
Mr.  Clinton,  or  whether  he  had  taken  his  resolution  from 
a  sense  of  duty  and  motives  of  patriotism,  or  whether  he 
"was  operated  upon  partially  by  all  these  considerations, 
I  leave  to  the  speculations  of  judicious  readers.  As  a 
general  rule,  indeed,  as  a  uniform  invariable  rule,  I  think 
when  a  man  acts  right,  he  ought  to  be  presumed  to  act 
from  right  motives,  unless  the  contrary  appears. 

The  causes  of  this  overwhelming  defeat  of  the  federal- 
ists may  be, 

First,  the  change  by  congress  of  the  embargo  for  the 
non-intercourse  system.  The  embargo  was  always  un- 
popular. If  it  was  a  prudent,  it  nevertheless  seemed  to 
the  people  a  timid  policy.  By  it  we  were  compelled  to 
remain  inactive  w'hile  the  inhabitants  of  all  other  parts  of 
the  globe  were  in  motion.  This  state  of  things  was  not 
suited  to  the  feelings  and  genius  and  enterprising  spirit  of 
the  American  people.  While  the  embargo  continued  the 
government  was  felt  by  business  men  as  a  kind  of  incu- 
bus, restraining  their  action  and  paralyizing  their  energies, 
but  when  relieved  from  it,  although  a  non-intercourse  was 
substituted,  men  felt  relieved  from   a  weight  which  had 


1810.]  OF  ?JE'.v-YOR!r.  287 

borne  them  down,  and  the  air  which  they  breathed  seemed 
freer. 

Second,  as  might  have  been  anticipated,  the  hostile 
feeling  against  Great  Britain  increased.  Impressions 
made  on  us  in  our  infancy  were  revived,  by  supposed  or 
real  injuries  received  from  a  nation  against  whom  we  had 
imbibed  prejudices  from  the  breasts  of  our  mothers. 
These  feelings  were  rendered  active,  and  embittered  by 
the  refusal  of  the  British  to  carry  into  effect  the  treaty 
made  by  their  accredited  agent  and  envoy,  Mr.  Erskine. 

To  these  causes  may  be  added  the  influence  of  the  pa- 
tronage of  the  general  government,  wielded  by  that  very 
discreet  and  judicious  statesman,  James  Madison.  What- 
ever changes  might  be  produced  in  the  state  of  New- York, 
the  most  sanguine  federalists  did  not  indulge  the  hope  of 
electing  a  federal  president  for  many  years  to  come.  Cal- 
culating politicians  therefore,  could  not  fail  of  perceiving 
that  the  republican  side  for  the  office-seeker  was  the  safest 
side.  I  of  course,  do  not  mention  this  last  cause  as  one 
operating  on  the  great  mass  of  either  of  the  two  great 
parties,  for  I  believe  that  an  immense  majority  of  both 
were  governed  in  their  political  action  by  a  desire  to  sup- 
port such  men  and  measures  as  they  believed  would  be 
most  likely  to  advance  the  prosperity,  secure  the  indepen- 
dence, and  perpetuate  the  institutions  of  the  country. 
There  is,  however,  in  this  as  in  all  other  countries,  a  por- 
tion of  the  population  who  are  governed  by  other  and 
more  selfish  considerations.  Hence,  in  accounting  for  ma- 
jorities, we  are  compelled  to  seek  for  the  motives  of  action 
which  governed  this    class  or  portion  of  our  population. 

It  is  fortunate,  however,  that  so  long  as  the  great  mass 
of  both  parties  are  honest  in  their  intentions,  there  is  no 
reason  to  apprehend  very  serious  detriment  to  the  repub- 
lic, should  this  unprincipled  selfish  portion  of  the  commu- 
nity throw  themselves  into  either  scale. 


288  POLITICAL    mSTOilY  [ISll. 


♦  CHAPTER   XV. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1810,  TO  MAY  1,  1811. 

The  entire  predominance  secured  to  the  republican 
party,  in  all  the  branches  of  the  state  government,  seemed 
rather  to  increase  than  diminish  the  industry  and  activity 
of  the  Martling  men,  in  the  personal  vrar  they  were 
waging,  in  the  city  of  New-York,  against  Mr.  Clinton. 
From  the  spirit  with  which  they  conducted  their  attacks, 
there  can  be  little  doubt  but  they  were  assured,  by  some 
of  the  members  of  Mr.  Madison's  administration,  of  their 
countenance  and  support.  This  combination  against  him, 
Mr.  Clinton  appears,  at  this  time,  to  have  regarded  with 
indifference,  if  not  with  contempt.  As  a  politician  it  was 
one  of  his  defects,  more  fully  afterwards  evinced  in  his 
subsequent  conduct,  that  he  was  too  apt  to  under  estimate 
the  power  and  means  of  annoyance  of  his  opponents. 

During  this  summer,  in  the  month  of  August,  Lieutenant 
Governor  Broome  departed  this  life,  leaving  vacant  the 
office  to  which  he  had  been  elected  at  the  last  annual 
election. 

The  legislature  met  on  the  29th  January,  1811.  Nathan 
Sanford,  of  New- York,  was  chosen  speaker  of  the  assem- 
bly, by  a  vote  of  sixty-four  to  thirty-three,  against  the 
federal  candidate.  Stephen  North,  of  Delaware  county, 
was  elected  clerk,  over  Mr.  James  Van  Ingen,  the  federal 
candidate.  The  vote  on  this  question  stood  sixty-four  to 
thirty-seven. 

The  governor's  speech  was  chiefly  occupied  by  remarks 
on  the  foreign  affairs  of  this  country;  but  he  again  urged 
the  protection  and  encouragement  of  domestic  manuafac- 
tures,  as  the  only  means  of  rendering  the  state  and  nation 


1811.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  289 

truly  independent,  and  he  also  again  invited  the  attention 
of  the  legislature  to  the  common  school  fund.  On  the 
next  day  after  the  organization  of  the  two  houses,  the 
assembly  elected  a  council  of  appointment.  Benjamin 
Coe,  of  the  southern;  James  W.  Wilkin,  of  the  middle; 
John  McLean,  of  the  eastern;  and  Philetus  Swift,  of  the 
western  districts,  were  chosen.  This  council,  at  the  first 
time  of  their  meeting,  which  was  on  the  first  day  of  Feb- 
ruary, undid  almost  every  important  thing  which  had  been 
done  by  the  preceding  council. 

Mr.  Hildreth  was  re-appointed  attorney  general;  Mr. 
Jenkins  secretary  of  state;  Mr.  Clinton  was  made  mayor 
of  New- York;  and  John  Van  Ness  Yates,  who  had  been 
removed  to  make  a  place  for  Mr.  Graham,  was  restored 
to  the  office  of  recorder  of  Albany.  The  federalists  who 
were  last  year  appointed  to  office  in  the  city  of  New-York, 
were  all  removed,  and  the  former  incumbents  restored  to 
the  offices  they  had  respectively  occupied. 

This  council,  in  the  course  of  their  operations,  produced 
an  entire  change  of  officers  throughout  the  state,  from  the 
highest  to  the  lowest,  at  any  rate  in  all  those  cases  where 
their  immediate  predecessors  had  made  appointments. 
But  in  truth,  the  public  mind  had  become  so  accustomed 
to  see  men  ejected  from  office  on  account  of  their  opinions, 
that  such  changes  ceased  to  be  matter  of  surprise,  or  to 
produce  any  excitement.  I  cannot  now  refrain  from 
noticing  one  little  act  of  the  council  which,  even  in  these 
times,  seems  to  me  quite  contemptible.  They  removed 
Gerrit  Y.  Lansing,  a  young  gentleman  of  great  respecta- 
bility, and  who,  since,  for  a  number  of  years,  represented 
the  county  of  Albany  in  the  congress  of  the  United  States, 
from  the  petty  office  of  master  in  chancery,  probably  for 
no  other  ostensible  reason  than  that  he  had  been  chosen 
clerk  of  the  assembly  during  the  administration  of  Gov. 

Lewis. 

19 


290  POt,lTlCAL     HISTORY  [1811. 

On  the  14th  February,  the  health  of  Mr.  Sanford  was 
so  much  impaired  that  he  was  compelled  to  resign  his 
office  of  speaker,  and  Willam  Ross,  of  Orange  county,  was 
chosen  to  fill  his  place. 

The  charter  of  the  United  States  Bank  expired  this 
year,  and  an  attempt  was  made  to  re-charter  it,  A  bill 
for  that  purpose,  passed  the  house  of  representatives,  after 
a  long  and  interesting  debate;  but  it  was  rejected  in  the 
senate  by  the  casting  vote  of  the  vice-president,  George 
Clinton.  He  assigned  briefly  the  reason  of  his  vote,  which 
was,  that  inasmuch  as  the  power  to  create  corporations 
was  not  expressly  granted  to  congress,  it  was  reserved, 
and  the  chartering  of  a  bank  was  therefore  unconstitutional. 
"  In  the  course  of  a  long  life,  said  the  venerable  man,  "  I 
have  found  that  government  is  not  to  be  strengthened  by 
an  assumption  of  doubtful  powers;  but  by  a  wise  and  en- 
ergetic execution  of  those  powers  which  are  incontestible." 

Whether  his  vote  was  right  or  wrong,  is  a  question  I  do 
not  propose  to  discuss,  but  I  cannot  refrain  from  declaring 
that  the  sentiment,  with  which  he  concluded  his  remarks, 
is  perfectly  just,  and  ought  to  be  deeply  impressed  on  the 
mind  of  every  statesman.* 

The  bill  incorporating  the  Mechanics  and  Farmers 
Bank  of  the  city  of  Albany,  was  passed,  ostensibly  for  the 
benefit  and  accommodation  of  the  mechanics  and  middling 
interest  of  that  city.  Accordingly,  the  president  of  the 
institution,  and  a  majority  of  the  directors,  were,  by  the 
original  charter,  required  to  be  practical  mechanics.!     Mr. 

*  The  above  was  written  in  1840.  Since  that  time,  this  part  of  Vice-Presiden* 
Clinton's  remarks  have  been  often  quoted  in  the  nowspapers,  and,  I  am  informed, 
that  Mr.  Allen,  who  edits  the  "Madisonian,"  a  Washington  paper,  has  asserted 
that  a  gentleman,  then  a  member  of  the  United  Slates  senate,  was  the  author  of 
the  sentence.  It  maybe  so;  but  if  so,  the  fact  ought  to  be  proved  before  it  receives 
general  credence.  It  would  require  strong  evidence  to  convince  me  that  George 
Clinton  borrowed  the  words  or  ideas  of  any  man.  If  the  allegation-be  not  true, 
this  attempt  to  rob  the  mighty  dead  deserves  the  indignation  and  contempt  of  every 
honorable  man. 

t  By  an  act  passed  March  21,  1836,  the  charter  was  altered,  and  the  stockhold- 


1811.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  291 

Southwick  was  the  first  president.  This  gentleman  was 
now  in  the  zenith  of  his  power  and  prosperity.  He  con- 
trolled the  Albany  Register,  which  at  that  time,  possessed 
a  most  commanding  influence  over  the  democratic  New- 
York  public.  He  was  prepossessing  in  his  appearance 
and  generous  in  his  nature,  and  was  all  but  worshipped 
by  the  republican  members  of  the  legislature.  He  was 
printer  to  the  state,  and  the  state  patronage  that  year,  by 
means  of  the  insolvent  notices  growing  out  of  a  law 
passed  during  the  session  of  1811,  was  throwing  into  his 
coffers  gold  in  unmeasured  quantities,and  now  the  influence 
and  power  of  a  popular  bank  was  placed  in  his  hands. 
We  shall  see  how  soon  all  these  advantages,  and  all  his 
flattering  prospects  and  high  hopes  vanished,  and  "  left 
not  a  wreck  behind." 

The  legislature  also  passed  an  act,  in  the  early  part  of 
the  session,  for  the  election  of  a  lieutenant  governor,  in 
lieu  of  the  deceased  Lieut.  Gov.  Broome.  Shortly  after 
the  passage  of  this  act,  and  on  the  14th  March,  at  a  legis- 
lative republican  caucus,  at  which  Wm.  W.  Gilbert  was 
chairman,  and  Jasper  Hopper  secretary,  De  Witt  Clinton 
was  nominated  to  be  supported  for  the  successor  of  Mr. 
Broome,  as  the  report  of  the  proceedings  of  the  meeting, 
contained  in  the  Register,  states,  hy  a  large  majority.  An 
address  was  issued  on  the  occasion,  signed  by  seventy- 
three  republican  members. 

What  were  the  motives  which  induced  Mr.  Clinton  to 
desire  or  accept  this  nomination  1  He  was  mayor  of  the 
great  city  of  New-York,  from  which,  he  no  doubt,  at  that 
time,  derived  emoluments  equal  to  fouteen  thousand  dol- 
lars. To  accept  the  office  of  lieutenant  governor ^  under 
Daniel  D.  Tompkins  as  goveryior^  was,  in  name  at  least, 

•T8  were  authorized  to  elect  any  of  their  members  directors,  and  the  directort 
can  lawfully  elect  such  persoa  for  president  as  they  may  think  proper,  irrespect- 
ive of  his  profession  or  occupation. 


292  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1811. 

and  in  the  eye  of  distant  spectators,  admitting  himself  to 
be  of  far  less  political  consequence  than  Mr.  Tompkins — 
an  admission,  it  is  to  be  presumed,  he  was  by  no  means 
ready  to  make.  Besides,  the  station  of  lieutenant  gover- 
nor did  not,  ex-qfficioy  confer  on  him  any  political  power. 

But  it  is  probable  that  Mr.  Clinton  believed  that  his 
presence  at  Albany,  during  the  session  of  the  legislature, 
and  a  personal  intercourse  with  the  members,  was  abso- 
lutely necessary  in  order  to  enable  him  to  retain  his  as- 
cendancy with  the  governing  party.  This  object  might 
have  been  better  accomplished  by  his  continuance  in  the 
senate  as  a  member  of  that  body.  In  this  capacity  he 
could,  with  propriety,  lead  off  on  all  the  great  and  most 
popular  measures  of  the  party,  and,  at  his  option,  take 
part  in  the  discussions,  and  by  the  publication  of  his 
speeches,  always  have  an  opportunity  of  presenting  his 
views  to  the  public,  without  the  mortification  of  continu- 
ally presenting  himself,  officially  at  least,  as  an  inferior  to 
Mr.  Tompkins.  He,  therefore,  must  have  preferred  a  seat 
in  the  senate  to  the  office  of  lieutenant  governor. 

If,  then,  we  conclude  that  Mr.  Clinton  believed,  and 
perhaps  correctly  believed,  that  his  personal  attendance 
at  Albany  was  absolutely  necessary,  to  enable  him  to 
defeat  the  machinations  of  his  enemies,  and  retain  his 
influence  in  the  state,  and  that,  for  that  purpose,  a  seat  in 
the  senate  was  more  desirable  than  the  office  of  lieutenant 
governor,  the  inference  is  most  manifest  that  he  would 
have  sought  a  re-election  as  senator,  had  he  not  have  be- 
come convinced  that  he  could  not  be  nominated  and  sup- 
ported by  the  republicans  of  the  southern  district.  That 
such  was,  in  truth,  the  state  of  feeling  among  the  majority 
of  the  republicans  of  that  district,  is  evident  from  the  de- 
velopments which  were  made  immediately  after  Mr. 
Clinton's  nomination  at  Albany. 

No  sooner  did  the  news  of  Mr.  Clinton's  nomination 


1811.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  293 

reach  New-York,  than  the  Martling  men  put  themselves 
in  motion  with  great  spirit  and  energy.  A  meeting  was 
forthwith  got  up,  in  Martling's  long  room,  at  a  public 
house  fronting  the  Park,  called  Tammany  Hall,  which 
was  claimed  as  the  democratic  head  quarters  for  the  city 
of  New-York.  Mr.  Teunis  Wortman,  who  was  the  pro- 
tegee of  Mr.  Clinton  during  the  struggle  with  Col.  Burr, 
was  one  of  the  most  busy  spirits  in  gathering  and  exciting 
the  opposition  on  this  occasion.  At  this  meeting,  Mangle 
Minthorne,  the  father-in-law  of  Governor  Tompkins,  pre- 
sided, and  John  Bingham  was  secretary.  They  adopted 
a  preamble  which  set  forth  that  they  believed  Mr.  Clinton 
was  cherishing  interests  distinct  and  separate  from  the 
general  interest  of  the  republican  party,  and  "  determined 
to  establish  in  his  person  a  pernicious  family  aristocracyj 
that  devotion  to  his  person  had  been,  in  a  great  measure, 
made  the  exclusive  test  of  merit,  and  the  only  passport  to 
promotion;''^  that  the  meeting  had  strong  reasons  to  be- 
lieve he  opposed  the  election  of  Mr.  Madison  to  the  pre- 
sidency of  the  United  States;  and  that  they  could  no 
longer  consider  him  a  member  of  the  republican  party. 
The  meeting  then  proceeded  to  nominate  Col.  Marinus 
Willet  as  the  republican  candidate  for  lieutenant  governor, 
and  appointed  Dr.  Saml.  L.  Mitchell,  Teunis  Wortman, 
Matthew  L.  Davis,  John  Ferguson,  and  others,  a  commit- 
tee to  promote  the  election  of  their  candidate.  Col.  Wil- 
let had  been  an  officer  of  great  merit  during  the  revolu- 
tionary war,  and  in  private  life  he  was  regarded  as  an 
amiable  and  meritorious  citizen.  In  his  politics,  however, 
he  had  been  wavering.  He  was  inclined  to  support  the 
Burr  faction,  and  was,  it  will  be  recollected,  a  partizan  of 
Lewis,  and  was  appointed  mayor  of  New-York,  on  the 
removal  of  De  Witt  Clinton,  by  the  same  council  who  had 
given  so  much  offence  to  the  republican  party.  It  is  not 
a  little  singular  that  this  meeting,  whose  object  was  to 


294  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1811. 

defeat  a  regular  state  caucus  nominationjin  their  preamble, 
avow  their  approbation  of  the  practice  of,  and  their  deter- 
mination to  support,  caucus  nominations. 

Mr.  Nathan  Sanford  was  an  open  and  avowed  adherent 
to  the  Martling  men,  and  w^as  subsequently  nominated, 
through  their  influence,  to  be  supported  as  the  successor 
of  Mr.  Clinton,  as  senator  from  the  southern  district.  Mr. 
Sanford,  at  that  time,  held,  under  Mr.  Madison,  the  office 
of  United  States  district  attorney  of  New.York — an  office 
■which  produced  him  annually,  on  an  average,  more  than 
thirty  thousand  dollars.  Mr.  Sanford  was  a  prudent  man. 
Would  he  have  publicly  identified  himself  wuth  the  Mart- 
ling  men  had  he  not  been  well  assured  that  the  proceed- 
ings of  those  men  were  approved  by  Mr.  Madison  1 

A  counter  meeting  was,  about  this  time,  held  by  the 
republican  Clintonians  in  New-York,  at  the  Union  Hotel, 
at  which  Arthur  Smith  was  chairman,  and  Hector  Craig 
secretary,  the  object  of  which  was  to  pass  resolutions 
approving  of  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Clinton;  but  the 
Martling  men  rushed  in  upon  them,  and  the  meeting  was 
broken  up  in  confusion. 

The  federalists  nominated  and  supported  Nicholas  Fish 
as  their  candidate  for  lieutenant  governor. 

Notwithstanding  the  vigorous  efforts  made  by  the  Mart- 
ling men,  among  whom  were  many  gentlemen  of  great 
weight  of  character  and  influence,  to  detach  from  Mr. 
Clinton  the  support  of  his  republican  friends,  such  was  the 
respect  for  his  talents,  and  confidence  in  his  integrity, 
entertained  by  the  republicans  of  the  country,  that  little 
impression  was  made  upon  them. 

During  this  year  the  mode  by  which  the  republican 
party  selected  their  candidates  for  the  senate  was  changed. 
Heretofore  the  republican  members  of  the  assembly,  from 
each  senatorial  district,  met  in  caucus,  and  by  a  majority 
of  votes  designated  the  candidate.     This  mode  of  nomina- 


1811.]  or  NEW-YOKK.  295 

tion  was  found  to  be  very  justly  objectionable.  The 
voice  of  those  republicans  who  happened  to  reside  in 
counties  represented  by  federalists  was  not  heard,  at  any 
rate  they  had  no  means  of  causing  their  influence  to  be 
felt  in  the  selection  ofpersonsfor  whom  they  were  to  vote 
for  the  important  office  of  a  senator;  and  the  long  resi- 
dence of  the  members  of  assembly,  from  a  given  district, 
at  Albany,  and  continued  and  frequent  association  together, 
seemed  calculated  to  lead  to  cabal  and  intrigue  in  the 
selection  of  such  persons,  as  candidates  for  the  senate, 
more  suited  to  the  gratification  of  the  individual  views  and 
interests  of  the  members,  than  acceptable  to  the  great 
body  of  the  democratic  party.  Instead,  therefore,  of  this 
mode  of  nomination,  delegates  were  hereafter  chosen  by  a 
county  meeting  of  delegates,  who  were  themselves  chosen 
by  that  portion  of  the  people  in  the  respective  towns,  who 
were  republicans,  at  their  primary  meetings. 

The  election,  in  April,  does  not  seem  to  have  been  very 
warmly  contested  in  any  other  part  of  the  state  but  the 
city  of  New-York.  In  that  city  and  county,  Mr.  Clinton 
received  but  five  hundred  and  ninety,  and  Col.  Willet  six 
hundred  and  seventy-eight,  while  the  federal  candidate, 
Mr.  Fish,  received  two  thousand  and  forty-four  votes: 
being  nearly  two  to  one  of  the  aggregate  vote  cast  for 
Clinton  and  Willet.  The  result  of  this  election  showed 
very  clearly  the  little  strength  that  remained  to  Mr.  Clin- 
ton among  the  New-York  republicans,  and  it  also  proves 
that  so  anxious  were  the  Martling  men  to  defeat  Mr.  C. 
that  a  majority  of  them  actually  voted  for  the  federal 
candidate,  Mr.  Fish.  By  this  vote  they  exhibited  this 
most  palpable  absurdity — 

They  opposed  the  election  of  Mr.  Clinton  because  they 
alleged  he  was  secretly  aiding  the  federal  interest,  and  to 
carry  out  this  opposition  they  voted  for  a  federalist  !  The 
federalists  carried  their  assembly  ticket  in  New- York  by 


296  POLITICAL  HISTORY  [1811. 

a  majority  of  more  than  fourteen  hundred.  Their  success 
was  unquestionably  owing  to  the  collisions  among  the 
republicans.  Indeed,  it  is  not  improbable  that  many  of 
the  Clintonians  voted  the  federal  assembly  ticket,  as  the 
persons  put  in  nomination  by  the  democratic  party  for  the 
assembly,  were  all,  or  nearly  all  of  them,  the  most  bitter 
and  uncompromising  enemies  of  Mr.  Clinton. 

Among  the  federal  gentlemen  elected,  were  Samuel 
Jones,  jun.,  afterwards  chancellor,  now  chief  justice  of 
the  superior  court  of  the  city,  and  Peter  W.  Radcliff. 

The  general  result  of  the  state  election  was  favorable  to 
the  democratic  party.  Of  the  members  of  the  assembly 
elected,  seventy-three  were  republicans,  and  thirty-nine 
were  federalists. 

The  following  persons,  all  republicans,  were  elected  to 
the  senate.  Nathan  Sanford,  from  the  southern}  William 
Taber  and  Erastus  Root,  from  the  middlej  John  Tayler, 
Rugglcs  Hubbard,  Ketchel  Bishop  and  Elisha  Arnold, 
from  the  eastern;  and  Casper  M.  Rouse,  from  the  western 
districts. 


1811.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  297 


CHAPTER    XVI. 

fROM  MAY  1,  1811,  TO  MAY  1,  1812. 

The  political  year  on  which  we  now  enter,  was  one  in 
which  two  important  projects  were  formed,  and  in  the  at- 
tempt to  execute  which,  great  alterations  were  produced 
in  the  condition  of  political  parties,  and  in  the  personal 
standing  and  influence  of  several  distinguished  individuals 
in  the  state  of  New-York.  The  one  was  the  support  of 
De  Witt  Clinton  in  opposition  to  Mr.  Madison  for  the 
presidency,  and  the  other  the  chartering  of  the  Bank  of 
America,     with  a  capital  of  six  millions  of  dollars. 

The  difficulties  between  America  and  Great  Britain  in- 
stead of  having  been  compromised  had  gone  on  for  years 
increasing.  In  addition  to  the  war  made  by  that  power 
upon  our  neutral  commerce,  it  claimed  the  right  of  search- 
ing our  merchant  vesselsj  and  if  sailors  or  other  persons 
were  found  there,  who  were  British  subjects,  of  impress- 
ing them  and  compelling  them  to  serve  in  the  British 
navy. 

This  practice  constituted  a  subaltern  officer  of  the  Bri- 
tish Navy,  the  sole  judge  of  who  was  and  who  was  not 
an  American  citizen.  It  was  not  only  vexatious  but  de- 
rogatory to  our  national  flag  and  national  honor. 

To  these  outrages  upon  our  commercial  and  personal 
rights,  Mr.  Jefferson  and  Mr.  Madison  had  opposed  em- 
bargo and  non-intercourse  laws,  and  many  very  learned 
and  able  arguments,  going  to  show  that  according  to 
Vattel  and  other  approved  writers  on  the  law  of  nations, 
we  were  right  and  the  British  were  wrong. 

The  course  Mr.  Madison  pursued  was  deemed  too  dila- 
tory and  inefficient  by  many  of  the  most  ardent  democrats. 


298  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1811. 

They  thought  the  character  and  honor  of  the  nation 
demanded  a  more  decided  and  energetic  action  on  the 
part  of  the  national  government.  Some  of  Mr.  Madi- 
son's "warmest  friends  from  the  south  and  west  became 
extremely  impatient  and  restive;  and  even  Mr.  Clay 
was  said  to  have  threatened  to  abandon  him  unless  he 
would  resort  to  more  vigorous  and  warlike  measures. 
Mr.  Clinton's  friends  in  this  state  had  great  confidence 
in  his  talents,  and  especially  in  his  energy  of  character. 
It  was,  probably,  more  for  this  than  any  other  reason,  that 
some  of  them  expressed  a  wish  to  see  him  elevated  to  the 
executive  chair  of  the  Union.  Mr.  Clinton  no  doubt,  more 
readily  listened  to  these  suggestions  in  consequence  of  the 
personal  hostility  that  Mr.  Madison  had,  as  he  believed, 
shown  towards  him.  Whatever  the  motive  may  have  been, 
I  have  no  manner  of  doubt,  that  Mr.  Clinton,  as  early  as 
the  summer  of  1811,  had  determined  upon  taking  the 
field  for  the  presidential  office  at  the  next  term. 

On  this  occasion,  as  on  many  others,  Mr.  Clinton  af- 
forded evidence  of  a  lamentable  defect  in  his  character  as 
a  politician.  That  defect  was  this:  a  neglect  to  cast  about 
for  means  for  the  accomplishment  of  his  end.  His  objects 
■were  always  magnificent,  his  ends  were  always  such  as 
evinced  an  elevated  and  lofty  mind,  but  he  did  not  seem 
to  be  aware  of  the  necessity  of  providing  ways  and  means 
to  accomplish  those  ends. 

How  was  he  to  be  made  president?  Was  it  by  the  re- 
publican party?  If  so,  according  to  the  existing  common 
law  of  the  party,  he  must  have  a  nomination  by  a  con- 
gressional caucus.  Could  he  obtain  that  nomination  ? 
He  does  not  appear  to  have  made  any  serious  effort  to  do 
so.  Indeed  the  attempt  itself  would  have  been  fool-har- 
diness. Mr.  Madison,  a  man  of  talents,  of  pure  morals, 
himself  being  on  the  spot,  wielding  the  patronage  of  the 
nation,  could  any   reasonable  man  think  of  detaching  a 


1811.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  299 

majority  of  his  political  friends,  so  decidedly  from  him 
as  to  declare  open  war  upon  him  by  refusing  to  give  him 
a  second  nomination  ? 

Could  Clinton  hope  to  succeed  against  the  admitted 
views  of  the  whole  south,  and  against  a  regular  republican 
caucus  nomination,  without  bringing  to  his  aid  the  support 
of  the  whole  federal  partyl  If  he  could  obtain  that  sup- 
port, had  he  not  the  best  possible  reason  to  apprehend 
that  nearly  all  his  republican  friends  would  abandon  him'? 
It  might  happen,  as  in  truth  it  did  happen,  that  a  consi- 
derable portion  of  his  political  friends  in  this  state,  from 
personal  respect  for  him,  and  confidence  in  him,  would  ad- 
here to  him;  but  did  it  not  occur  to  him,  that  he  himself 
had  denounced  the  leaders  of  the  federalists  as  men  of 
such  vaulting  ambition  that  they  had  rather  "  reign  in  hell, 
than  serve  in  heaven,"  and  that  this  denunciation  had  been 
rung  in  the  ears  of  every  freeman  in  the  United  States? 
When  the  great  mass  of  the  republicans  in  the  nation  saw 
him  acting  in  concert  with  a  party  he  had  thus  denounced, 
had  he  not  reason  to  believe  they  would  withdraw  from 
him  their  support,  and  treat  him  as  an  enemy?  It  is 
hardly  possible  but  that  these  considerations  must  have 
forced  themselves  into  his  mind.  It  is, however,  too  easy 
for  a  man  to  persuade  himself  that  what  he  ardently  wishes 
should  be,  will  be. 

It  is  not  improbable  to  me  that  the  ardor  of  his  ambi- 
tion hurried  him  into  a  determination  to  engage  in  this 
contest  without  any  regular  or  fixed  scheme  of  action. 

The  other  project  to  which  I  allude,  was  the  plan  of 
establishing  a  great  bank  in  the  city  of  New-York. 

The  refusal  to  re-charter  the  Bank  of  the  United  States; 
had  thrown  back  into  the  hands  of  the  stockholders,  a 
large  amount  of  uninvested  cash  capital;  and  by  this  time 
it  began  to  be  perceived  that  the  city  of  New- York  and 
not  Philadelphia,  was  destined  to  be  the  great  commercial 


300  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1811. 

emporium  of  North  America.  This  opinion  led  enter- 
prising and  speculating  men,  as  well  as  many  capitalists, 
to  project  the  establishment  of  a  great  moneyed  institution 
in  New-York,  with  a  capital  of  six  millions  of  dollars. 
An  association  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  a  charter  for 
such  a  bank  was  soon  formed,  and  they  early  commenced 
their  operations.  They  knew  that  the  republican  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature  would  foresee  that  the  majority  of  the 
stock,  and  the  consequent  control  of  this  gigantic  institu- 
tion, would  fall  into  the  hands  of  their  political  oppo- 
nents; and  they  must  have  anticipated  the  jealousy  and 
fearful  apprehensions  which  would  be  entertained  by  all 
the  other  banks  of  the  state,  of  the  power  of  a  company 
which  was  to  wield  so  immense  and  formidable  a  capital. 
The  projectors  believed,  and  correctly  believed,  that 
leading  federal  politicians  would  support  their  application, 
for  the  same  reason  that  they  anticipated  opposition  from 
the  republican  party.  They  knew  that  intelligent  men  of 
both  parties  were  fully  aware  of  the  truth  of  the  position 
that  money  is  power.  They  therefore  assumed,  and  the 
eventjustified  the  assumption,  that  they  should  have  the 
support  of  the  federal  members  of  the  legislature.  It 
was  for  this  reason  that  their  principal  attention  was 
directed  to  the  republican  members  elect.  To  secure 
them,  or  a  portion  of  them,  in  favor  of  their  project,  they 
early  enlisted  as  their  agent  David  Thomas,  a  gentleman 
who  had  been  long  a  member  of  congress,  a  zealous  re- 
publican from  the  year  1798,  whom  we  have  seen  at  that 
time  an  efficient  member  of  the  assembly,  and  who  lately 
had  been  turned  out  of  the  office  of  state  treasurer,  by 
the  united  action  of  the  federalists  and  Lewisites,  in 
consequence,  it  was  said,  of  his  adherence  to  the  republi- 
can party.  Could  such  a  man  be  suspected  of  a  want  of 
fidelity  to  the  cause  of  republicanism?  Besides,  Gen. 
Thomas  was  a  silent,  cautious  man,  artful,  sagacious,  and 


1811.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  301 

possessed  of  a  deep  knowledge  of  men.  Gen.  Thomas, 
during  the  summer  of  1811,  found  it  convenient  to  make 
an  extensive  tour  through  the  south-western  part  of  the 
state,  and  as  he  was  universally  known  to  be  a  leading  re- 
publican, he  was  naturally  brought  in  contact  with  the  re- 
publican members  elected  to  the  next  legislature,  in  nearly 
every  county  through  which  he  passed.  Some  of  his  com- 
munications with  them  will  be  seen  in  the  disclosures  of 
Casper  M.  Rouse,  which  will  be  detailed  in  another  place. 
The  other  prominent  agent  residing  in  the  interior  of  the 
state,  whom  the  company  selected  and  employed,  was  Solo- 
mon SouTHwicK.  He,  as  has  been  before  remarked,  control- 
led the  paper  at  the  seat  of  government,  which,  if  not  the 
dictator,  was  the  accredited  organ  of  the  democratic  party 
in  the  state.  Though  not  the  silent,  cautious,  plotting  man 
that  Gen.  Thomas  was,  he  was,  as  I  have  before  remarked, 
exceedingly  fascinating  in  his  address,  ardent  in  his  pur- 
suits, and  almost  irresistible  in  his  persuasive  powers. 
He  too,  was  known  to  be  the  devoted  and  confidential 
friend  of  De  Witt  Clinton.  These,  with  other  subordi- 
nate agents,  were  the  men  on  whom  the  company  relied 
to  bring  to  their  aid  a  sufficient  portion  of  the  republican 
party  to  render  their  application  successful. 

I  have  omitted  to  mention  that  on  the  8th  day  of  April, 
1811,  the  legislature  passed  an  act  appointing  Gov.  Mor- 
ris, Stephen  Van  Rensselaer,  De  Witt  Clinton,  William 
North,  Simeon  De  Witt,  Thomas  Eddy,  Peter  B.  Porter, 
Robert  R.  Livingston,  and  Robert  Fulton,  commissioners 
for  taking  into  consideration  all  matters  relating  to  inland 
navigation.  These  commissioners  were  authorized  to 
make  application  to  congress,  or  any  state  or  territory,  and 
request  them  to  co-operate  with  New- York  in  the  project 
of  improving  the  navigation  between  the  tide  waters  of 
Hudson's  river  and  the  great  western  lakes,  to  accept  of 
donations  from  individuals  or  companies  for  the  promotion 


302  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1812. 

of  the  object  in  view,  and  to  ascertain  whether  loans 
could  be  effected  on  advantageous  terms  upon  the  credit 
of  the  state.  This  was  the  commencement  of  the  canal 
policy  in  New-York.  It  is  evident,  from  running  one's 
eye  over  the  names  of  the  commissioners,  that  it  was  not 
a  party  measure.  The  bill  was  passed  by  the  combined 
efforts  of  Mr.  Clinton  and  Gen.  Piatt  in  the  senate,  and 
by  the  support  of  enlightened  and  liberal  men  of  both 
parties  in  the  assembly. 

In  pursuance  of  the  authority  contained  in  the  law, 
Mr.  Clinton  and  Mr.  Morris,  in  December,  1811,  visit- 
ed Washington,  and  endeavored  to  obtain  from  the 
United  States  a  grant  of  land  in  aid  of  the  prosecution  of 
the  scheme.  In  this  application  they  were  wholly  unsuc- 
cessful.    Congress  declined  to  act  at  all  in  the  matter. 

The  opponents  of  Mr.  Clinton  charged  this  journey  as 
having  been  undertaken  by  him  for  electioneering  pur- 
poses, and  the  Martling  men  scouted  the  idea  of  a  canal 
from  Albany  as  so  visionary  and  absurd  that  no  rational 
man  for  one  moment,  could  seriously  entertain  it.  A  pro- 
position at  this  day,  to  construct  a  rail  road  from  the 
earth  to  the  moon,  could  not  be  treated  with  more  derision 
than  the  Martling  men  treated  the  canal  project.  They 
charged  Mr.  Clinton  with  pretending  to  favor  the  scheme 
for  no  other  purpose  than  to  make  of  it  a  hobby  (a 
ridiculous  one,  they  said,)  on  which  to  ride  into  power. 

The  legislature  assembled  on  the  28lh  of  January,  and 
Alexander  Sheldon,  the  old  republican  speaker,  was 
again  chosen  to  that  office,  and  Samuel  North,  clerk. 

A  principal  part  of  the  governors  speech  was  occupied 
in  depicting  the  danger  arising  from  a  redundant  paper 
currency.  He  protested  against  any  considerable  increase 
of  the  number,  or  the  capital  of  the  banks,  evidently 
with  a  view  to  prepare  the  minds  of  the  members  to  re- 
sist the   application  for  a  charter  to  the  Bank  of  Ame- 


1812.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  303 

rica.  "  It  is  questionable,"  said  the  governor,  "  wheth- 
er they"  (banks,)  "  have  not  already  been  multiplied 
to  an  alarming  extent."  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the 
governor  in  his  speech,  wholly  abstains  from  any  refer- 
ence to  the  scheme  of  internal  improvements,  or  to  the 
proceeedings  of  the  commissioners  in  relation  to  that  im- 
portant subject.  The  address  of  the  governor  occupies 
three  printed  columns  in  a  newspaper,  and  he  deems  it 
necessary  to  apologize  for  its  "  unusual  length^ 

If  I  may  venture  to  express  an  opinion,  I  will  say,  that 
in  my  judgment  the  speeches  of  Gov.  Tompkins  are  gene- 
rally extremely  well  written,  and  give  evidence  of  highly 
respectable  talents. as  a  writer.  Indeed,  I  think  that  both 
his  friends  and  enemies  have  not  done  him  justice  in  giv- 
ing him  credit  for  as  much  and  as  high  a  grade  of  talents 
as  he  actually  possessed.  But  I  am  wandering  from 
my  subject.  I  referred  to  the  apology  of  the  governor  for 
the  great  length  of  his  speech,  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
marking that  I  humbly  conceive  that  a  capital  error  has 
crept  into  the  executive  communications  of  this  and  seve- 
ral other  states.  The  duty  of  the  governor  is  clearly  and 
briefly  stated  in  the  fourth  section  of  the  third  article  of  the 
present  constitution.  "  He  shall  communicate,  by  message 
to  the  legislature,  the  condition  of  the  state,  and  recom- 
mend such  matters  to  them  as  he  shall  judge  expedient." 
It  appears  to  me,  he  should  simply  state  facts  necessary  to 
be  made  known  to  the  representatives  of  the  people,  with- 
out comment,  and  recommend  measures  merely  by  laying 
down  propositions  without  an  attempt  to  prove  by  argu- 
ment the  correctness  of  such  propositions.  His  friends 
in  the  legislature  ought  to  be  able  to  comment  on  his  facts 
and  to  set  forth  and  establish  by  argument,  the  fitness  of 
the  measures  which  he  recommends^  instead  of  this,  our 
governors  have  acquired  the  habit  of,  I  was  going  to  say, 
declaiming  at  great  length,  on  the  facts  they  state,  and  of 


3(H  POLITICAL    HISTOEY  [1S12. 

going  into  a  train  of  reasoning  to  support  every  position 
they  take  in  relation  to  the  measures  they  recommend. 
In  this  way  our  governors  will  shortly  become  authors, 
and  write  books  instead  of  messages.  Is  there  not  some- 
thing disrespectful  to  the  legislature  when  a  governor  elects 
to  occupy  their  time  in  animadversions  upon,  or  inferences 
from  the  facts  he  communicates,  or  in  arguments,  the  ob- 
jects of  which  are  to  prove  the  fitness  of  the  measures  he 
recommends?  Would  not  a  stranger  be  led  to  conclude  that 
he  thought  the  persons  whom  he  addressed  incapable  of 
judging  of  the  truth  and  merits  of  his  propositions,  unless 
he  should  enlighten  them  by  a  course  of  reasoning?  It 
is  still  worse,  it  is  an  insult,  to  occupy  their  time  in  lec- 
turing them  like  school  boys  in  relation  to  the  principles 
of  our  government  and  on  the  subject  of  the  natural 
rights  of  men.  Mr.  De  Witt  Clinton  was  the  first  govern- 
or who  sinned  in  this  respect;  and  his  apology  was,  that 
during  nearly  all  the  time  he  was  governor,  a  majority  of 
the  legislature  was  against  him,  and  he  had  no  other  means 
of  presenting  to  the  people  his  principles  of  action,  and 
the  reasons  upon  which  his  opinions  were  founded.  This, 
although  it  might  afford  for  him  some  excuse,  after  all, 
was  rather  a  sorry  apology  to  his  legislative  friends  who 
were  in  the  minority. 

On  the  second  day  of  February,  the  assembly  chose  for 
a  council  of  appointment,  William  W.  Gilbert,  of  the 
southern;  Johannus  Bruyn,  of  the  middle;  Henry  Yates, 
jun.,  of  the  eastern;  and  Francis  A.  Bloodgood,  of  the 
western  districts. 

This  council  was  decidedly  Clintonian;  but  the  party 
decrees  having  been  carried  into  effect  by  the  preceding 
coimcil,  little  remained  to  be  done  by  this.  Such  appoint- 
ments, however,  as  were  made,  were  made  in  accordance 
with  the  wishes  and  views  of  Mr.  Clinton. 

Although   the   republican  party  held  a  pretty   strong 


1812.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  305 

majority  In  the  assemblyj  there  were  few  men  among 
them  who  possessed  much  talent  as  speakers. 

John  W.  Taylor,  then  a  young  man,  and  who,  for  the 
first  time,  made  his  appearance  in  public  life,  as  a  member 
of  assembly,  since  known  as  a  distinguished  member  of 
congress,  and  speaker  of  the  house  of  representatives  of 
the  United  States,  was  the  only  republican  member  of 
much  talent  as  a  debater,  or  tact  in  legislation;  but  as  this 
was  his  first  session,  inexperience  prevented  him  from 
possessing  the  latter  qualification  to  any  degree  of  perfec- 
tion: although,  he  afterwards  proved  himself,  and  is  now 
acknowledged  to  be,  a  man  exceedingly  sagacious,  and 
profoundly  versed  in  the  ways  of  men. 

Mr.  William  Ross,  a  democratic  member  from  the 
county  of  Orange,  spoke  often,  but  with  little  effect.  Mr. 
Ross,  though  an  honest  and  kind  hearted  man,  was  a  vain 
man.  He  was,  beyond  question,  sincerely  and  warmly 
attached  to  the  republican  party,  but  his  vanity  and  want 
of  real  talent,  rendered  him  rather  a  cause  of  amusement 
than  a  terror  to  his  opponents.  Mr.  Van  Vechten,  from 
Albany,  and  Mr.  Jones,  of  New-York,  stood  at  the  head 
of  the  federal  phalanx  in  the  assembly. 

On  the  5  th  of  February,  a  bill  passed  the  assembly  for 
the  appointment  of  David  Thomas  as  treasurer,  in  lieu  of 
Mr.  Lansing,  by  a  majority  of  eight  votes:  there  being 
only  fifty  votes  for  the  bill,  and  forty-two  against  it. 
This  vote  shows  that  it  was  not  a  party  vote;  for  there 
were,  as  has  been  stated,  seventy-three  republican,  and 
thirty-nine  federal  members  elected.  The  last  legislature 
was,  in  both  branches,  republican,  and  yet  Mr.  Lansing 
was  re-appointed  treasurer.  How  came  Thomas  now  to 
be  appointed  1  Was  not  his  appointment  pressed  by 
Southwick  and  other  bank  agents  and  members,  in  order 
to  give  more  weight  to  the  exertions  it  was  intended  he 
should  make  in  favor  of  chartering  the  Bank  of  America  1 

20 


* 

306  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1812. 

Thisj  too,  may  have  been  foreseen  by  some  of  the  more 
wary  opponents  of  that  measure,  and  to  this,  perhaps, 
was  owing  the  fact  that  instead  of  receiving  seventy-three 
votes  in  the  assembly,  he  actually  received  but  fifty.  The 
bill  passed  the  senate  by  a  vote  of  nineteen  to  five,  and 
became  a  law  on  the  8th  of  February.* 

Early  in  the  session  the  applicants  for  the  six  million 
bank  introduced  their  petition  into  the  assembly.  They 
offered  the  extravagant  bonus  of  six  hundred  thousand 
dollars;  to  be  paid  in  the  following  manner,  and  for  the 
following  purposes: — 

Four  hundred  thousand  dollars  to  the  common- school 
fund;  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  to  the  literature  fund; 
&  1  hundred  thousand  dollars  to  be  paid  into  the  treasury 
at  the  end  of  twenty  years,  provided  no  other  bank  should, 
in  that  time,  be  chartered  by  the  state. 

The  sum  of  one  million  of  dollars  was  also  to  be  loaned 
to  the  state,  at  five  per  cent  interest,  to  be  laid  out  in 
constructing  canals;  and  one  million  of  dollars  was  to  be 
loaned  to  farmers,  I  suppose,  at  six  per  cent. 

Mr.  Southwick,  and  the  other  managers,  had  early  em- 
ployed a  great  number  of  sub-agents,  some  of  whom  were 
officers  of  the  house  of  assembly,  but  most  of  them  were 
low  and  worthless  fellows,  who  were  to  carry  messages, 
and  listen  to  what  was  said  by  the  members,  at  their  rooms 
and  other  places,  and  report  at  head  quarters.     Among 

*  About  this  time,  there  being  two  vacancies  in  the  board  of  regents  of  the  Uni- 
niversity,  the  legislature  proceeded  to  supply  such  vacancies.  Joseph  C-  Yates, 
and  Solomon  Southwick,  were  the  caucus  republican  candidates.  Judges  Spencer 
and  Taylerhad  exerted  all  their  influence  to  prevent  the  nomination  of  Southwick, 
but  without  success;  a  circumstance,  which,  considering  the  great  influence  of 
those  gentlemen,  very  clearly  demonstrates  the  almost  irresistible  influence,  at 
that  time,  of  Solomon  Southwick. 

Judge  Yates  and  Mr.  Southwick  were  elected,  against  Smith  Thompson  and 
Stephen  Van  Rensselaer.  Such  is  the  madness  of  party,  and  the  unreasonableness 
of  individual  ambition. 

It  is  deeply  to  be  lamented  that  party  interest,  and  individual  political  ambition, 
should  intrude  into  the  calm  retreats  of  science,  and  the  quiet  walks  of  literature. 


1812.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  307 

other  agents  thus  employed,  was  an  Irishman  by  the  name 
of  John  Martin,  who,  from  being  an  itinerant  preacher  of 
the  gospel,  had,  for  a  year  or  two  before,  devoted  himself 
to  the  labor  of  making  political  converts.  So  numerous 
were  these  sub-agents,  (who,  by  the  bye,  were  generally 
supplied  with  handbills  containing  the  printed  proposals 
of  the  banking  company,)  that  not  only  the  doors  of  the 
two  houses,  but  the  rooms  of  members,  were  besieged  by 
them. 

Judge  Spencer,  Judge  Tayler,  Governor  Tompkins  and 
other  leading  and  efficient  republicans,  declared  open  war 
against  the  bank,  its  agents  and  supporters.  Unfortu- 
nately, Spencer  and  Tayler,  who  took  the  lead  in  these 
denunciations,  were  known  to  be  interested  in  the  existing 
banks.  Judge  Tayler  being  president  of  the  State  Bank, 
and  Judge  Spencer  being  supposed  to  be  largely  interested 
in  the  same  bank,  as  well  as  in  the  Manhattan  Bank  of 
the  city  of  New-York.  The  bank  applicants,  therefore, 
charged  them,  with  some  degree  of  plausibility,  with 
being  influenced  more  by  selfish  views  and  private  interest, 
than  by  a  regard  for  the  public  weal. 

Thomas  and  Southwick,  and  many  other  of  the  bank 
applicants,  were  loud  in  their  praises  of  De  Witt  Clinton, 
and  declared  themselves  the  advocates  of  his  election  to 
the  presidency.  Although  Mr.  Clinton  announced  that 
he  was  against  the  bank,  he  was  very  careful  to  protest 
against  making  a  support  or  opposition  to  it  a  test  of  po- 
litical merit,  or  political  correctness.  In  assuming  this 
position,  it  will  be  seen  that  it  was  adverse  to  the  ground 
he  had  taken  with  respect  to  those  who  favored  the  incor- 
poration of  the  Merchants  Bank.  But  consistency  is  not 
a  distinguishing  characteristic  of  politicians.  Mr.  Clinton 
frankly  told  Judge  Spencer  that,  although  he  should  give 
his  vote,  if  required  to  vote,  against  the  chartering  of  the 
American  Banking  Company,  he  should,  on  no  account^ 


308  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1812. 

be  drawn  Into  a  quarrel  with  the  supporters  of  that  mea- 
sure. This  determination  led  to  coldness  between  these 
two  gentlemen,  who  were  brothers-in-law,  and  who  had, 
for  the  long  period  of  fourteen  years,  (since  1798,)  been, 
politically,  cordially  united,  and  personally,  ardent  friends. 
A  short  time  afterwards,  as  we  shall  see,  this  coldness 
produced  bitter  personal  hostility. 

Mr.  Southwick,  in  order  to  justify  Mr.  Clinton  in  the 
ground  he  had  taken,  not  to  allow  the  support  of  the 
bank  to  be  made  a  political  question,  and  to  quiet  the 
tender  consciences  of  his  republican  friends,  who  were 
inclined  to  support  the  bank,  on  the  28th  February  came 
out  with  an  article  in  the  Register,  in  which  he  argued, 
that  the  question  of  granting  a  charter  to  a  banking  com- 
pany could  not  be  of  a  political  nature,  and  concluded  by 
saying  that,  "  He  who  supports  or  opposes  a  bank  upon 
the  grounds  of  federalism  or  republicanism,  is  either  a 
deceiver  or  deceived,  and  will  not  be  listened  to  by  any 
man  of  sense  or  experience."  How  different  was  his 
language  in  relation  to  the  Merchants  Bank  ! 

The  enacting  clause  of  the  bill  for  chartering  the  Bank 
of  America,  passed  the  assembly  by  a  vote  of  fifty-two  to 
forty-six.  After  the  question  was  taken  on  the  first 
clause,  some  alarming  disclosures  were  made,  of  attempts 
by  the  applicants  to  bribe  members  of  both  houses;  but  I 
propose  giving  a  more  detailed  account  of  those  proceed- 
ings, in  the  senate  as  well  as  in  the  assembly,  in  another 
place.  At  present,  I  will  merely  state  the  fact,  that  it 
was  rendered  most  evident  that  attempts  had  been  made 
by  the  agents  of  the  company,  to  corrupt  the  members  of 
the  legislature;  and  yet,  that  after  these  facts  had  been 
proved,  the  bank  party,  in  the  assembly,  increased,  as  it 
also  did  in  the  case  of  the  Merchants  Bank;  for,  on  the 
final  passage  of  the  bill,  in  the  assembly,  the  vote  was 
fifty-eight  to  thirty-nine. 


1812.]  OF    KEW-YORK.  309 

The  bill  was  sent  to  the  senate,  and  when  that  house 
was  in  committee  of  the  whole  on  it  a  motion  was 
made  to  reject  it,  but  the  motion  failed  of  success, 
the  vote  being  fifteen  to  thirteen.  Mr.  E.  P.  Livingston 
was  in  the  chair,  who  was  known  to  be  in  favor  of  the 
bill.  This  trial  of  strength  rendered  it  certain  that  the 
bill  would  pass  the  senate,  and  become  a  law;  whereupon, 
on  the  27th  March,  the  governor  sent  a  message  to  the 
two  houses  proroguing  the  legislature  until  the  21st  of 
May. 

The  cause  of  the  prorogation  assigned  by  the  governor, 
was,  that  sufficient  proof  had  been  furnished  to  show  that 
the  bank  applicants  had  used,  or  attempted  to  use,  corrupt 
means  to  procure  a  charter. 

When  the  message  was  read  in  the  assembly  a  scene  of 
confusion  and  uproar  ensued,  and,  for  a  few  moments, 
outrage  and  violence.  Under  the  constitution  of  1777, 
the  governor  possessed  the  power  of  prorogation,  but  it 
had  been  considered  as  a  remnant  of  royal  prerogative, 
unsuitable  to  the  genius  of  our  government;  and  I  am  not 
aware  that,  in  time  of  peace,  it  had  ever  before  been  ex- 
ercised. But  if,  as  was  believed,  and  is  still  believed  by 
many  intelligent,  unprejudiced  men,  a  bill  was  about  to 
be  forced  through  the  legislature  by  palpably  corrupt 
means,  it  seems  to  me  any  constitutional  measure  to  arrest 
its  progress  was  justifiable. 

The  bank  advocates  in  the  legislature,  had  systemati- 
cally prevented  any  action  on  nearly  all  the  important 
business  before  them.  Holding  a  majority,  they  seemed 
determined  that  nothing  of  consequence  should  be  done 
until  their  favorite  measure  should  be  adopted.  The  more 
pressing  the  necessity  of  legislation,  on  any  given  sub- 
ject, the  more  carefully  did  they  watch,  and  strenuously 
oppose,  final  action  on  it.  Of  two  hundred  and  forty-two 
bills,  ultimately  passed  during  that  session,  the  greater 


310  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1812. 

part  of  which  were  then  on  their  table,  they  had  passed 
but  thirty-nine  when  they  were  prorogued. 

The  friends  of  the  bank  resorted  to  another  contrivance. 
Nearly  all  of  them  professed  to  be  in  favor  of  a  nomina- 
tion of  Mr.  Clinton  for  president,  by  a  legislative  republi- 
can caucus;  but  they,  on  one  pretence  and  another,  refused 
to  go  into  caucus  on  that  subject  until  after  the  question 
of  chartering  the  bank  should  be  disposed  of.  This  was 
excessively  annoying  to  Mr.  Clinton;  for  the  members 
of  congress  had  also,  for  another  cause,  put  off,  to  an  unu- 
sually late  period,  their  caucus,  which  was  to  be  held  for  the 
same  purpose.  A  large  portion  of  them,  with  Mr.  Clay 
at  their  head,  had  refused  to  support  Mr.  Madison,  or  go 
into  a  caucus,  until  he  should  send  a  message  to  congress 
recommending  a  declaration  of  war  against  Great  Britain. 
This,  he,  for  a  long  time,  hesitated  to  do,  and  indeed  did 
not  do,  until  June  following.  Mr.  Clinton  was,  for  reasons 
which  must  be  obvious,  extremely  anxious  that  his  nomi- 
nation, if  made  at  all  by  the  legislature  of  New-York, 
should  be  made  before  a  congressional  nomination  of  Mr. 
Madison  should  be  announced.  But  the  bank  men, 
although  professing  to  be  exceedingly  anxious  for  Mr. 
C.'s  success,  peremptorily  refused  to  move  in  the  matter 
until  they  had  procured  a  charter  for  their  bank.  Ought 
not  Mr.  Clinton  instantly  to  have  cast  off  such  friends  1 

The  bank  men,  and  many  other  of  Mr.  Clinton's  friends, 
say,  that  Gov.  Tompkins  had,  at  that  time,  fixed  his  eye 
on  the  presidency;  that  he  apprehended  the  success  of 
Mr.  C.  would  be  fatal  to  his  hopes  in  that  respect;  and 
that,  to  prevent  the  nomination  of  Clinton  by  a  New-York 
legislative  caucus,  before  a  congressional  caucus  for  the 
nomination  of  Mr.  Madison  could  be  held,  was  the  true 
reason  and  controlling  cause  of  his  venturing  on  so  bold  a 
measure  as  the  prorogation.  This,  however,  is  matter  of 
conjecture. 


1812.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  311 

Before  the  members  left  Albany,  thirty-nine  republicans 
signed  and  published  an  address  to  their  constituents,  ap- 
proving of  the  prorogation,  and  twenty-eight  democratic 
members  issued  a  solemn  protest  against  that  measure. 

'The  Albany  Register  also,  came  out  in  open  and  bitter 
denunciations  against  Gov.  Tompkins,  Judge  Spencer, 
Judge  Tayler,  Secretary  Jenkins,  and  all  who  supported 
them. 

In  this  broken  and  disturbed  state  and  condition  of  the 
republican  party  the  April  elections  came  on.  The  result 
was,  a  small  majority  of  federalists  were  returned  to  the 
assembly,  but  not  so  great  but  that  there  would,  in  the 
next  legislature,  be  a  republican  majority  upon  a  joint 
ballot  of  the  two  houses. 

The  federalists  carried  the  southern  and  eastern  districts. 
In  the  southern  district  two  republican  tickets  were  sup- 
ported, each  claiming  to  be  the  real  Simon  Pures.  The 
Clintonian  republicans  supported  William  Freeman  and 
John  Garretson;  and  the  Martling  men  held  up  John 
Bingham  and  Robert  Moore.  To  show  the  relative 
strength,  at  that  time,  in  the  southern  district,  of  the  two 
sections  of  the  democratic  party,  I  give  the  result  of  the 
canvass — 

William  Freeman  received  three  thousand  and  twenty- 
seven  votes;  John  Garretson  two  thousand  nine  hundred 
and  fifty-seven;  John  Bingham  one  thousand  seven  hun- 
dred and  six;  and  Robert  Moore  one  thousand  six  hundred 
and  twenty. 

The  senators  elected  from  the  southern  district,  were 
Peter  W.  Radcliff  and  Elbert  H.  Jones;  middle,  Martin 
Van  Buren  ;  eastern,  Gerrit  Wendell;  western,  Francis 
A.  Bloodgood,  Archibald  S.  Clarke,  Russel  Atwater  and 
Henry  Hrger. 

Mr.  Hager  was  from  the  county  of  Schoharie;  but, 
according  to  usage,  the  candidate  ought  to  have  been  taken 


312  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1812. 

from  the  county  of  Otsego;  and  a  republican  convention 
of  the  latter  county  had  recommended,  to  the  district  con- 
vention, Elijah  H.  Metcalf,  Esq.,  a  worthy  and  popular 
citizen,  who  was  then  a  member  of  the  assembly.  But 
Mr.  Metcalf  had  voted  for  the  bank,  and  the  district  con- 
vention, for  that  reason,  refused  to  nominate  him.* 

On  the  20th  of  April,  the  venerable  vice-president, 
George  Clinton,  died  at  Washington,  aged  seventy-three 
years,  and  thus  terminated  a  long  and  laborious  life,  the 
greater  part  of  which  had  been  devoted  to  the  service  of 
his  country.  He  commenced  his  public  life  as  a  member 
of  the  colonial  assembly,  and,  during  the  stormy  period 
which  preceded  the  American  Revolution,  he  sustained 
with  unshaken  firmness  the  rights  of  the  people.  During 
the  whole  of  the  revolutionary  war  he  stood  at  the  head 
of  the  government  of  the  state,  and  was  commander-in- 
chief  of  the  militia.  After  the  close  of  that  war  we  have 
briefly  sketched  his  history  until  he  became  the  second 
officer  in  the  government  of  the  United  States.  Every 
act  of  his,  and  every  thing  which  remains  of  him,  affords 
evidence  that  he  w^as  a  man  of  strong  and  vigorous  intel- 
lect, of  great  decision  of  character,  and  that  he  was  a  good 
judge  of  men,  and  possessed  a  profound  knowledge  of  the 
human  heart. 

Either  before,  or  during  the  recess  of  the  legislature,  a 
singular  project  was  formed,  to  defeat  the  passage  of  the 
bill  to  incorporate  the  stockholders  of  the  Bank  of  Ame- 
rica. On  the  question  of  approving  the  bill,  in  the 
council  of  revision,  it  was  supposed  that  body  would  vote 
in  the  following  manner: — 

*  About  the  time  of  the  prorogation  of  the  lef,.slature,  a  newspaper  was  estab- 
lished by  Judge  Spencer,  and  his  immediate  friends,  in  the  city  of  Albany,  for  the 
express  purpose  of  counteracting  the  impressions  intended  to  be  made  by  Mr. 
Southwickjby  means  of  the  Albany  Register.  This  paper  was  called  the  Albany 
Republican,  and  was  printed  by  one  Brown.  From  that  circumstance  it  acquired 
the  name  of  "TAe  Broum  Rppublican."    It  expired  soon  after  the  election. 


1812.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  3 13 

For  the  bill — Lansing,  Kent,  Thompson  and  Van  Ness. 
Against  the  bill — The  governor,  Spencer  and  Yates. 

If,  therefore,  two  members  could  be  added  to  the  coun- 
cil, who  were  against  the  bill,  it  would  not  become  a  law, 
unless  passed  by  two-thirds  of  both  houses:  of  which, 
there  could  be  no  reasonable  apprehension,  or  expectation. 

Shortly  after  the  prorogation,  a  petition  was  drawn  and 
circulated,  addressed  to  the  council  of  appointment,  pray- 
ing for  the  appointment  of  two  additional  judges  of  the 
supreme  court.  This  petition,  after  setting  forth  some 
reasons  for  the  measure,  states  as  follows: — "  We,"  say 
the  petitioners,  "  owe  it  to  candor  to  say  that  a  powerful 
motive  which  urges  us  to  request  the  immediate  appoint- 
ment of  two  judges,  is,  that  they  would  arrest  and  prevent 
the  passage  of  a  bill  before  the  legislature,  entitled  "  An 
Act  to  incorporate  the  Bank  of  America,"  without  waiting 
for  the  sanction  of  the  legislature,  who  can  scarcely  be 
supposed  to  approve  a  measure  to  defeat  a  bill  passed  by 
themselves."  It  will  be  recollected,  that  under  the  old 
constitution,  the  council  of  appointment  could  create  as 
many  judges  of  the  supreme  court  as  they  thought  properj 
but  the  additional  judges,  thus  appointed,  could  receive  no 
pay  without  an  act  of  the  legislature.  The  petition  from 
which  I  have  quoted,  was  accompanied  by  a  printed  circu- 
lar, signed  by  Stephen  Phelps — (Bates  1)  Eli  Hill  and 
John  C.  Spencer,  in  which  they  stated  that  the  petition 
"  was  not  intended  for  general  circulation^  hut  was  to  he 
presented  to  influential  repuhlica7is  only.'' 

Whether  this  petition  was  ever  presented  to  the  council 
I  am  not  advised.  I  cannot  imagine  a  state  of  things 
which  would  afford  a  justification,  or  even  a  reasonable 
excuse,  for  such  a  flagrant  abuse  of  power.  That  the 
project  was  seriously  contemplated,  I  have  not  a  shadow 
of  doubtj  for  William  Ross,  of  Newburgh,  told  me  he  was 
to  have  been  appointed  one  of  the  judges,  had  the  scheme 


314  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1812. 

been  carried  into  effect.  The  extracts  from  the  petition 
and  circular,  were  made  by  me,  from  a  copy  of  those  docu- 
ments published  in  the  Albany  Register  in  1812. 

The  legislature  again  met  on  the  21st  of  May,  and  the 
senate  immediately  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  bill 
to  incorporate  the  stockholders  of  the  Bank  of  America. 
The  opposition  to  its  passage,  was  ably  conducted,  and 
long  continued.  Among  the  most  zealous  and  talented 
opponents  of  the  bill,  may  be  ranked  Gen.  Erastus  Root, 
of  Delaware  county,  from  the  middle  district,  and  Gov. 
Lewis  may  be  considered  as  its  leading  and  most  efficient 
advocate. 

The  bill  finally  passed  by  the  following  vote: — 

Affirmative — Arnold,  Bishop,  Haight,  Hall,  Hopkins, 
Humphries,  Lewis,  Livingston,  Martin,  Parris,  Phelps, 
Piatt,  Rich,  Smally,  Smith,  Stearns  and  Taber — seventeen 
Negative — Bloodgood,  Carle,CoejGilbert,  Hubbard, Root, 
Rouse,  Sanford,  Tayler,  Townsend,  White,  Wilkin  and 
Yates — thirteen. 

All  the  federal  senators,  and,  I  believe,  all  the  federal 
members  of  the  assembly,  except  Mr.  Lorillard  of  New- 
York,  voted  for  the  charter. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  corrupt  means  were  used  to  induce 
members  to  vote  for  this  bank;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  I 
have  no  doubt  that  many,  I  hope  a  majority,  of  those  who 
finally  did  vote  for  it,  honestly  believed  that  the  bill  had 
merits,  and  that  the  public  interest  demanded  its  passage. 
A  question,  however,  presents  itself,  of  considerable  im- 
portance to  a  conscientious  man;  and  it  is  this: — Grant 
that  the  bill,  in  the  abstract,  had  merits;  that  had  the  ap- 
plication come  directly  from  the  stockholders,  without 
the  interference  of  agents,  or  any  improper  conduct  on  the 
part  of  the  applicants,  the  public  interest  demanded  its 
passage;  but  concede  further,  that  corrupt  means  had  been 
used  to  induce  a  part  of  the  members  to  support  the  bill. 


1812.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  315 

who,  erroneously,  but  sincerely  believed  it  ought  not  to 
be  passed:  under  such  circumstances,  ought  that  portion 
of  the  members,  who  honestly  believed  the  passage  of  the 
bill  advantageous  to  the  public,  to  have  voted  for  it  ? 

Immediately  after  the  question  in  relation  to  the  Bank 
of  America  was  disposed  of,  and  on  the  28th  of  May,  a 
meeting  of  the  republican  members  of  the  legislature  was 
held,  at  which  Gen.  James  W.  Wilkin  was  chairman,  and 
Alexander  Sheldon,  speaker  of  the  assembly,  was  secreta- 
ry, when  Mr.  Clinton  was  nominated  as  the  candidate  to 
be  supported  for  the  next  president  by  the  republicans  of 
the  state  of  New-York;  and  his  support  was  recommended 
to  the  republican  party  of  the  union.  A  committee  of 
seventeen  gentlemen  was  appointed  to  use  their  efforts  to 
carry  into  effect  the  objects  of  the  meeting. 

Some  democratic  members  from  the  southern  and  mid- 
dle districts,  among  whom  were  Gov.  Lewis  and  Nathan 
Sanford,  refused  to  attend  this  caucus.  These  gentlemen 
professed  to  be  in  principle  opposed  to  Mr.  Clinton,  while 
others  from  the  interior  and  western,  and  eastern  parts  of 
the  state,  although  personal  friends  of  Mr.  C,  and  sin- 
cerely desirous  of  seeing  him  elected  president,  doubted 
the  expediency  of  nominating  him  for  that  office;  because 
such  nomination  might,  in  their  judgment,  divide  and  dis- 
tract the  republican  party,  and  would  eventually  prove 
injurious  to  Mr.  Clinton  himself.  I  have  been  informed 
by  gentlemen  who  were  present  on  that  occasion,  and 
who  were  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton,  that  so  many  of 
the  members  doubted  the  expediency  of  a  nomination,  that 
it  would  not  have  been  made  had  not  Mr.  Van  Cortland 
and  other  members  of  congress  arrived  from  Washington, 
urging,  and  bringing  letters  from  Gideon  Granger,  post- 
master general,  also  urging  the  immediate  nomination  of 
Mr.  Clinton.  Judge  Spencer  and  Judge  Tayler  still  held 
back,  but  finally  were  induced  to  attend,  rather  as  specta- 


316  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1812. 

tors,  a  meeting  to  deliberate  on  the  propriety  of  holding 
a  caucus  for  the  purpose  of  nominating.  At  that  meet- 
ing Gen.  Root  made  a  long  and  able  speech  against  the 
proposed  measure.  He  showed  that  it  could  not  be  suc- 
cessful. That  as  a  republican  candidate,  Mr.  Clinton 
could  not,  and  as  the  federal  candidate  he  ought  not,  to 
succeed.  That  the  issue  of  the  contest  would  be  ruinous 
to  the  political  prospects  of  Mr.  Clinton.  Gen.  Root 
spoke  of  the  character  and  talents  of  Mr.  Clinton  in  terms 
of  high  commendation;  that  the  hopes  of  New-York 
were  in  a  great  degree  centered  upon  him,  that  his  nomi- 
nation would  blight  those  hopes,  and  he  concluded  a  most 
eloquent  harangue  by  exclaiming,  "  Spare,  O  spare  that 
great  man  !"  A  majority  of  the  members,  among  whom 
was  that  shrewd  and  cautious  politician,  John  W.  Taylor, 
notwithstanding  the  opposition,  determined  to  proceed 
and  bring  Mr.  Clinton  into  the  field.  Judge  Spencer  and 
Judge  Tayler  and  a  majority  of  the  republicans,  except 
ing  Mr.  Lewis  and  the  Martling  men  from  New-York, 
and  I  believe  Gen.  Root,  finally  acquiesced  in  the  nomi- 
nation^  at  any  rate  it  was  understood  they  would  take  no 
steps  to  oppose  it;  and  I  perceive  that  Judge  Tayler  was 
made  one  of  the  committee  of  seventeen.  And  here  I 
cannot  help  remarking,  that  Mr.  Southwick,  in  the  Re- 
gister, was  continually  charging  Gov.  Tompkins,  Judge 
Spencer,  Judge  Tayler,  and  the  secretary  of  state,  Mr. 
Jenkins,  with  decided  and  active  hostility  to  Mr.  Clin- 
ton, while  the  New-York  Columbian,  the  paper  which 
seemed  to  be  the  accredited  organ  of  Mr.  Clinton  in  that 
city,  claimed  these  gentlemen  as  the  friends  and  support- 
ers of  Mr.  C. 

Nothing  could  have  been  more  impolitic  than  the  con- 
duct of  Mr.  Southwick,  in  this  respect.  He  undoubtedly 
must  have  been   acting  from  feelings  of  private  resent- 


1812.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  317 

ment  towards  Gov.  Tompkins,  Judge  Spencer  and  the 
others. 

The  legislature  adjourned  on  the  20th  of  June,  and  on 
the  same  day  congress  declared  war  against  Great  Britain. 
In  the  house  of  representatives  the  vote  in  favor  of  the 
bill  declaring  war,  was  seventy-nine  to  forty-nine.  Very 
few  of  the  republican  representatives  from  New-York 
voted  for  the  measure.  They  opposed  it,  not  because,  in 
their  judgment,  the  nation  had  not  sufficient  cause  of  war, 
but  because  we  were  unprepared  for  the  commencement 
of  hostilities.  Most  of  the  republican  members  from 
New-York  who  voted  against  the  war  were  Clintonians. 
In  the  senate,  Mr.  German,  who,  by  general  consent,  was 
understood  to  speak  the  sentiments  of  Mr.  Clinton,  made 
a  speech  and  voted  against  the  war. 

The  declaration  of  war  by  congress,  soon  became  al- 
most the  sole  matter  in  controversy  between  the  political 
parties  which  existed  in  the  nation.  But  the  party  which 
opposed  the  war,  in  point  of  fact,  consisted  of  two  parties. 
The  old  federal  party  opposed  the  war,  on  the  ground  that 
we  had  no  sufficient  cause  of  war  with  Great  Britain,  or 
if  we  had,  we  had  still  greater  cause  for  war  with  France; 
and  that  if  we  had  commenced  hostilities  against  the  lat- 
ter, the  cause  of  our  difficulties  with  the  former  would 
have  been  removed.  Another  class  of  citizens  opposed 
the  war,  because  they  believed  it  declared  prematurely, 
and  before  the  nation  was  prepared  to  assume  a  belligerent 
attitude. 

A  very  large  majority  of  the  old  republican  party  ap- 
proved of  the  war,  and  the  time  of  declaring  it. 

At  the  September  court  of  oyer  and  terminer,  held  in 
the  county  of  Chenango,  Gen.  David  Thomas  having  been 
arrested  on  a  warrant  issued  by  Judge  Spencer,  was  in- 
dicted by  a  grand  jury  of  Chenango  county,  for  an  attempt 
to  bribe  Casper  M.  RcusC;  a  senator  from  that  county,  to 


318  POLITICAL    HISTOKTf  [1812. 

give  his  vote  for  the  incorporation  of  the  Bank  of  Ame- 
rica. Judge  Van  Ness  presided  on  this  occasion,  and 
Thomas  was  acquitted  by  the  jury. 

During  the  same  month  Solomon  Southwick  was  indicted 
and  tried  in  the  county  of  Montgomery,  before  Chief 
Justice  Kent,  for  an  attempt  to  bribe  Alexander  Sheldon, 
the  speaker  of  the  assembly,  and  found  not  guilty. 

I  may  have  occasion  to  state  the  substance  of  the  proofs 
offered  to  sustain  the  charges  against  these  gentlemen. 
At  present  I  will  only  remark,  that  the  proofs  in  the  case 
of  Thomas  as  well  as  Southwick,  were  very  strong,  I  had 
almost  said  conclusive;  but  that  it  appeared  that  both 
Rouse  and  Sheldon  entertained  the  propositions  made 
to  them,  concealed  the  affront,  and  for  a  considerable 
time,  at  least  several  months,  treated  the  men  who  they 
alleged  had  attempted  to  corrupt  them,  as  associates  and 
friends;  and  that  Doct.  Sheldon  had  voted  for  Southwick 
for  a  regent  of  the  university,  long  after  the  attempt  to 
bribe,  and  long  before  he  made  the  complaint.  By  the 
skill  and  address  of  the  council  who  defended  Gen. 
Thomas  and  Mr.  Southwick,  the  traverse  jury  seemed  to 
have  been  made  to  believe  that  their  business  was  rather 
to  pass  upon  the  merits  of  the  complainants,  than  to  pro- 
nounce on  the  innocence  or  guilt  of  the  accused.  It  did 
not  seem  to  have  occurred  to  them  that  both  Rouse  and 
Sheldon  might  be  bad  men,  and  yet  that  Thomas  and 
Southwick  might  have  violated  the  statute  by  an  attempt 
to  bribe  them. 

My  excuse  for  mentioning  these  two  cases  is,  that  at 
the  time,  the  prosecutions  were  considered  to  be  of  a  poli- 
tical character,  and  because  Gen.  Thomas  and  Mr.  South- 
wick were  considered  prominent  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton, 
and  the  charges  against  them  tended  to  injure  the  cause 
of  Mr.  Clinton. 

In   September   an   attempt   was  made  by  some  repub- 


1812.]  OF    NEW-rORK.  319' 

licans  of  the  union  to  induce  Mr.  Clinton  to  withdraw 
from  the  presidential  canvass.  With  this  view.  Gen. 
King,  then  of  that  part  of  Massachusetts  called  the  pro- 
vince of  Maine,  now  the  state  of  Maine,  and  half  broth- 
er to  the  late  Rufus  King,  a  man  of  considerable  standing 
in  the  republican  party,  visited  Albany,  and  had  an  inter- 
view with  Judge  Spencer  and  Judge  Tayler,  whom  he  no 
doubt  considered  as  the  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton;  in  which 
he  stated  that  as  he  believed  the  republicans  of  the  union, 
and  especially  of  the  eastern  states,  entertained  a  high  re- 
spect for  the  talents  and  charater  of  Mr.  Clinton,  he 
unquestionably  stood  the  first  man  in  the  republican  ranks 
at  the  north;  that  at  a  proper  time  they  would  gladly  yield 
him  their  support  for  the  presidency,  that  at  the  next 
election  he  might  be  cordially  sustained  for  the  office  of 
vice-president;  but  that  the  war  having  been  declared 
under  Mr.  Madison's  administration,  the  election  of  Mr. 
Clinton  in  opposition  to  him,  would  be  regarded  at  home, 
and  especially  abroad,  as  an  evidence  that  the  American 
people  were  opposed  to  the  war, — an  attitude  he  was  sure 
the  majority  of  the  people  were  unwilling  to  assume, — be- 
sides which,  the  support  of  Mr.  Clinton  by  any  consider- 
able portion  of  the  republican  party,  (and  without  such 
support  it  was  evident  he  could  not  be  elected,)  would 
inevitably  break  in  pieces  and  destroy  that  party,  and  give 
the  federalists  the  ascendency. 

Influenced  by  these  representations  and  views,  Judge 
Spencer  and  Mr.  Tayler,  wrote  a  letter  to  Mr.  Richard 
Riker,  a  prominent  member  of  the  Clintonian  committee, 
introducing  Gen.  King  to  him,  in  which  they  recommend- 
ed an  arrangement  which  would  avoid  a  competition  be- 
tween Mr.  Clinton  and  Mr.  Madison,  and  they  concluded 
by  expressslng  an  opinion  that  "  no  event  would  exalt 
Mr.  Clinton  higher  than  a  surrender  of  his  pretensions  to 
the  presidential  chair." 


320  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1812. 

To  this  letter  Mr.  Riker  replied  on  the  7th  October, 
that  Mr.  Clinton  would  not  withdraw  from  being  a  candi- 
date, that  he  had  been  made  such  by  the  people,  and  they 
had  a  right  to  his  name.  He  adds,  that  the  suggestions 
of  Gen.  King,  that  Massachusetts  will  support  Mr.  Clin- 
ton at  the  end  of  four  years,  cannot  be  listened  to  for 
a  moment;  and  that  bargains  between  politicians  are  in- 
consistent w^th  the  purity  and  dignity  of  republicanism 
This  correspondence  Mr.  Riker  caused  to  be  published. 

It  is  very  evident  that  Messrs.  Spencer  and  Tayler  did 
not  intend  their  letter  for  publication.  Nor  can  I  perceive 
in  it  any  evidence  of  unfriendly  feelings  towards  Mr.  Clin- 
ton. The  publication  of  it  by  Mr.  Clinton's  New- York 
friends  must  have  been  with  a  view  to  the  manufacture  of 
political  capital.  Of  the  expediency  or  propriety  of  the 
act,  different  men  will  now,  as  they  did  then,  form  diflfer- 
ent  opinions. 

The  legislature  met  on  the  2d  of  November  for  the  pur- 
pose of  choosing  electors.  The  candidates  for  the  speak- 
er's chair,  were  Jacob  Rutsen  Van  Rensselaer  of  Colum- 
bia county,  on  the  federal  side,  and  William  Ross,  on  the 
republican.  Mr.  Ross  received  forty-six  votes,  Mr.  Hunt- 
ington one,  and  Mr.  Van  Rensselaer  fifty-eight,  who  of 
course  was  elected.  This  vote  showed  a  federal  majority 
of  thirteen  in  the  assembly.  Mr.  James  Van  Ingen  was 
elected  clerk. 

No  sooner  had  the  legislature  convened,  than  it  was 
ascertained  that  about  twenty  republican  members  of  the 
assembly  would  not  consent  to  vote  for  Clintonian  electors. 
This  little  band  was  headed  by  Gen.  Root.  Mr.  Martin 
Van  Buren,  from  the  middle  district,  made  his  appear- 
ance in  public  life  for  the  first  time  at  this  session.  He 
had  no  agency  in  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Clinton  by  the 
legislative  caucus  on  the  28th  of  May,  for  he  was  not  a 
member  of  the  legislature  then  in  existence.     What  his 


1812.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  321 

private  opinion  of  the  expediency  of  that  nomination 
was,  I  do  not  know;  but  he  had  been  trained  up  to  the 
doctrine,  that  on  all  mere  personal  questions  it  was  the 
duty  of  a  politician  to  go  according  to  the  will  of  the 
majority  of  his  political  friends,  when  that  will  was  fairly 
expressed.  On  the  question  of  the  support  of  Mr.  Clin- 
ton for  the  presidency,  Mr.  Van  Buren  considered  that 
the  republican  party  had  spoken  at  the  legislative  caucus 
in  May.  The  will  of  the  party,  as  then  expressed,  he 
deemed  it  his  duty  to  aid  in  carrying  into  effect. 

The  parties  in  the  legislature,  as  to  numbers,  stood  as 
follows : — in  the  senate  there  were  nine  federalists,  four 
Madisonian  and  nineteen  Clintonian  republicans;  in  the 
assembly  there  were  fifty-eight  federalists,  twenty-two 
Madisonian,  and  twenty-nine  Clintonian  republicans. 
The  federalists  could  and  did  nominate  federal  electors  in 
the  assembly,  and  the  republicans  nominated  Clintonian 
electors  in  the  senate.  This  state  of  things,  it  will  be 
seen,  would  compel  the  Madisonians  on  joint  ballot  to  vote 
either  for  Clintonian  or  federal  electors,  or  not  vote  at  all. 
In  the  sequel  they  adopted  the  latter  course. 

Notwithstanding  this  curious  state  of  things,  Mr.  Van 
Buren,  on  his  arrival  at  Albany,  found  Mr.  Clinton  and 
his  friends  entirely  destitute  of  any  plan  of  operations. 
The  talents,  address  and  activity  of  Mr.  Van  Buren  soon 
placed  him  at  the  head  of  the  republican  friends  of  Mr. 
Clinton  in  the  senate,  and  in  fact  in  the  legislature.  A 
caucus  of  republican  members  was  held  for  the  purpose  of 
selecting  candidates  for  electors,  but  such  was  the  obsti- 
nacy of  the  Madisonians  that  no  ticket  could  be  agreed 
on  which  they  would  support.  They  insisted  that  a  por- 
tion of  the  electors  should  be  run  who  would  vote  for 
Mr.  Madison,  and  to  this  the  Clintonians  would  not  con- 
sent. Eventually  a  Clintonian  ticket  was  agreed  upon, 
at  the  head  of  which  Judge  Yates  was  placed.     That  ticket 

21 


322  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1812. 

was  nominated  in  the  senate.  In  the  assembly  the  vote 
stood  for  federal  electors  fifty-eight,  Clintonian  twenty- 
nine,  and  Madisonian  twenty-two.  Of  course  the  federal 
ticket  was  nominated.  Upon  joint  ballot  the  Clintonian 
ticket  received  seventy-four  votes,  the  federal  forty-five, 
and  there  were  twenty-eight  blank  votes.  The  Madisonians 
cast  the  blank  votes.  Of  course  a  part  of  the  federalists 
voted  the  Clintonian  ticket,  which  gave  it  a  majority  of 
all  the  votes,  and  the  Clintonian  electors  were  therefore 
declared  duly  chosen. 

The  governor's  speech  was  principally  confined  to  de- 
tails of  the  incidents  of  ihe  war  then  raging  on  the  north- 
ern and  western  frontier  of  the  state,  and  the  answer  to 
it  by  the  assembly,  was  rather  courteous  than  otherwise, 
but  pretty  clearly  indicating  the  grounds  assumed  by  the 
federal  party  during  the  war. 

Upon  the  canvass  of  the  presidential  votes  at  Washing 
ton,  it  appeared  that  Mr.  Madison  had  received  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty-eight  votes,  and  Mr.  Clinton  eighty-nine. 
The  states  which  voted  for  Mr.  Clinton  were  New-York, 
New-Jersey,  Delaware,  all  the  New-England  states  except 
Vermont,  and  Maryland,  gave  him  five  votes.  He  did 
not  receive  a  single  vote  south  of  the  Potomac. 


OF   NEW-YORK. 


CHAPTER    XVII 

BANKS. 


323 


Unfortunately  the  chartering  of  banks  has  had  a 
considerable  influence  on  political  parties,  and  their  action, 
m  the  state  of  New-York.  For  this  reason  the  history  of 
political  parties  among  us  would  be  quite  imperfectj  with- 
out at  the  same  time  presenting  some  view  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  legislature  on  the  various  applications 
which,  from  time  to  time,  were  made  for  charters  by 
banking  companies.  And,  on  many  accounts,  I  have 
thought  it  would  be  more  acceptable  to  the  reader  to  sub- 
mit a  brief  statement  of  these  proceedings,  detached,  as  far 
as  it  can  be,  from  other  political  operations. 

The  first  banking  association  formed  in  this  state  was 
in  the  year  1784,  when  a  joint  stock  company  in  the  city 
of  New-York  was  organized.  The  articles  of  co-partner- 
ship were  drawn  by  Gen.  Hamilton,  and  the  capital 
invested  was  five  hundred  thousand  dollars. (2  Ham.  219.) 

Under  these  articles,  or  constitution,  as  they  were  called, 
the  company  commenced  and  continued  banking  opera- 
tions, till  March  21,  1791,  when  it  was  chartered,  under 
the  name  of  the  Bank  of  New-York,  which  company  is 
now  in  existence.  The  articles  of  association  bore  date 
February  26,  1784.  It  will  therefore  be  perceived,  that 
more  than  seven  years  elapsed,  after  they  commenced 
banking  business,  before  the  legislature  granted  them  a 
charter,  and  that  the  state  government  had  been  in  opera- 
tion about  fourteen  years  before  any  bank  charter  was 
granted. 

The  fact  was,  the  community  were  smarting  under  the 
losses  sustained  by  the  continental  paper  money  system, 


324  POLITICAL    HISTORY 

The  legislature  of  New- York  were  therefore  unwilling, 
by  any  act  of  theirs,  to  countenance  the  issue  of  paper,  as 
mo7t,ey^  by  any  association  whatever.  Hence  no  charter 
could  be  obtained  for  the  only  banking  company  in  the 
state,  until  after  that  company  had  been  in  operation  for 
more  than  seven  years.  "  A  memorial,"  says  Mr.  John 
C.  Hamilton,  (2  Ham.  340,)  "  to  incorporate  the  bank  of 
which  the  constitution  had  been  framed  by  Hamilton,  was 
presented  to  the  legislature  early  in  1784,  but  so  prevalent 
was  the  jealousy  oi  moneyed  influence  that  it  was  compelled 
to  conduct  its  affairs  during  six  years  without  coporate 
immunities.  The  cry  arose  that  banks  were  combinations 
of  the  rich  against  the  poor,"  &c.  These  "  corporate 
immunities,"  of  which  Mr.  Hamilton  speaks,  were  the 
privilege  of  sueing  in  their  corporate  names,  and  an  ex- 
emption of  liability  of  the  individual  stockholders  for  a 
greater  sum  than  the  amount  of  stock  held  by  them.  No 
sane  man  then  dreamed  of  granting  to  these  companies 
the  exclusive  right  of  issuing  and  circulating  their  notes 
as  cash. 

In  1792  the  Bank  of  Albany  was  chartered,  with  a 
capital  of  two  hundred  and  forty  thousand  dollarsj  and  in 
1793  the  Bank  of  Columbia,  located  at  Hudson,  where  it 
was  proposed  to  open  a  foreign  trade  and  to  establish  the 
whale  fishery  business,  by  a  company  from  Rhode  Island, 
was  chartered,  with  a  capital  of  one  hundred  and  sixty 
thousand  dollars.  The  Bank  of  New- York  had  a  capital 
of  a  million  of  dollars.  So  far,  the  question  of  charter- 
ing banks  had  been  kept  entirely  clear  of  party  conside- 
rations. It  was  a  mere  question  whether  the  convenience 
of  the  community,  and  the  exigencies  of  commerce,  de- 
manded these  institutions;  and,  until  the  year  1799,  the 
sum  of  one  million  and  six  hundred  thousand  dollars  only, 
was  employed  for  banking  purposes. 

From  the  election  of  John  Adams  to  the  presidency,  in 


OF    NEW-YORK.  325 

1796  party  excitement  had  prodigiously  increased,  and  at 
no  point  in  the  Union  was  party  heat  more  intense  than 
in  the  city  of  New- York:  especially  from  1798  to  1800. 
The  stock  and  direction  of  the  Bank  of  New-York  was  in 
the  hands  of  federalists.  It  had,  no  doubt,  fallen  into 
their  hands,  not  in  consequence  of  any  political  mancBu- 
vring,  but  by  the  natural  course  of  trade  and  traffic  among 
the  citizens.  Col.  Burr,  and  some  of  his  political  friends, 
believed  that  the  power  of  that  bank  was  used  to  patron- 
ise and  encourage  business  men  who  were  federalists,  and 
to  cramp  and  embarrass  those  who  held  republican  princi- 
ples. Hence  the  origination  of  a  plan  to  incorporate  an 
additional  bank  in  the  city.  But  this  project  could  not  be 
carried  into  effect  by  the  consent  of  the  legislature,  inas- 
much as  a  majority  of  both  houses  of  the  legislature  were 
federal  J  and  even  the  republican  part  of  the  members 
were  so  jealous  of  the  corrupt  influence  of  moneyed  institu- 
tions that  few  of  them  would  consent  to  charter  a  bank  in 
a  city  which  already  was  furnished  with  one  institution. 
The  result,  therefore,  was  a  conclusion  that  the  real  object 
of  the  scheme  must  be  concealed:  that  is,  the  legislature 
must  be  blindfolded,  and,  in  that  condition,  must  be  indu- 
ced to  do  that  which  they  would  not  do  with  their  eyes 
open.  In  other  words,  it  was  deliberately  contrived  to 
cheat  the  legislature  out  of  a  charter;  and  the  following 
was  the  scheme  contrived: — The  yellow  fever  had  then 
recently  made  dreadful  ravages  in  the  city.  That  event, 
with  other  circumstances,  called  the  attention  of  the  pub- 
lic to  the  necessity  of  a  plentiful  supply  of  the  city  of 
New-York  with  pure  and  wholesoihe  waterj  and  the  le- 
gislature were,  with  great  plausibility,  invoked  to  charter, 
on  the  most  liberal  terms,  a  company  who  professed  their 
willingness  to  undertake  so  useful  an  enterprise.  As  it 
was  uncertain  what  amount  of  capital  might  be  required 
to  effect  the  contemplated  object,  and  with  a  view  to  avoid 


326  POLITICAL    HISTORY 

any  chance  of  failure  on  account  of  a  deficiency  of  capital, 
the  company  requested  to  be  authorized  to  raise  two  mil- 
lions of  dollarsj  but  as  it  was  possible,  and  indeed  proba- 
ble, that  the  construction  of  the  water  works  would  not 
absorb  the  whole  of  that  sum,  they  asked  for  a  provision 
that  the  "  surplus  capital  might  be  employed  in  any  way 
not  inconsistent  with  the  laws  and  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  or  of  the  state  of  New-York."  This  request 
seemed  to  be  but  reasonable,  and  yet,  under  the  authority 
of  these  few  words,  one  of  the  most  powerful  and  formida- 
ble moneyed  monopolies  has  grown  up  that  ever  existed 
in  this  state.  It  is  certain  that  an  immense  majority  of 
the  legislature  did  not  entertain  the  least  suspicion  that 
this  charter  contained  a  grant  of  banking  powers, 

Mr.  Davis,  {in  1  Burr^  413,)  says,  "  that  it  has  been 
said  that  the  charter  was  obtained  by  trick  and  manage- 
ment, and  that,  if  suspicion  had  been  entertained  by  any 
of  the  federal  members.  Col.  Burr  could  not  have  got  the 
bill  through  the  legislature."  Now,  I  do  not  contend  but 
that  some  of  the  federal  members  may  have  known  that 
the  real  object  of  the  bill  was  to  create  a  bank;  but  might 
not  those  same  federal  members  have  had  secured  to  them 
an  interest  which  w'ould  make  it  profitable  to  them  to  have 
the  bill  become  a  law  %  Was  not  human  nature  the  same 
then  as  it  was  in  1805,  and  in  1812,  when  the  Merchants 
Bank  and  the  Bank  of  America  were  chartered  %  But 
will  Mr.  Davis  pretend — will  any  man  pretend — that,  if 
a  majority  of  the  members  had  been  apprised  of  the  real 
object  of  the  bill,  it  would  have  passed  1  Certainly  not; 
and  Mr.  Davis  virtually  admits  it.  But  Mr.  Davis  justi- 
fies, and  claims  triumphantly  to  have  justified,  Col.  Burr, 
by  affirming  that  he  did  not  misrepresent  or  misstate  to 
any  member  the  object  he  had  in  view.  Indeed  !  Col. 
Burr  did  not  positively  utter  a  falsehood,  and,  therefore, 
he  was  not  guilty  of  fraud  and  trick.     By  the  moral,  as 


OF   NEW-YORK.  327 

"well  as  municipal  law,  I  had  supposed  that  the  suppres- 
sion of  truth,  in  cases  of  this  sort,  rendered  the  actor 
equally  culpable  as  would  the  affirmation  of  a  falsehood. 
Col.  Burr  was  a  member  of  the  legislature,  and  had  so- 
lemnly sworn  to  perform  his  duty  as  such  member.  The 
bill  was  hurried  through  both  houses,  at  the  heel  of  the 
Session,  and,  in  the  senate,  was  reported  complete  by  a 
select  committee,  and  was  never  referred  to  the  committee 
of  the  whole  of  that  house.  True,  Mr,  Davis  says  that 
Col.  Burr  stated  the  object  of  the  bill  to  one  federal  sena- 
tor from  the  western  district,  who,  I  infer,  was  Mr.  Tho- 
mas Morris. 

The  attention  of  the  council  of  revision,  to  the  clause 
under  which  banking  powers  were  claimed,  was  called  by 
the  ohief  justice,  to  whom  the  bill  was  referred.  But, 
ft-om  an  extract  from  their  minutes,  which  will  be  found 
in  1  Burr,  415,  it  is  very  evident  that  it  did  not  seem  to 
the  members  of  that  body  that  in  passing  that  bill  they 
were  chartering  a  bank  which  was  to  exist  as  long  as  the 
government  lasted.  From  the  words  used  by  the  chief 
justice,  who  objected  to  the  bill  in  consequence  of  the 
clause  in  question,  he  appeared  to  be  apprehensive  that 
the  company  would  employ  their  capital  in  trade,  &c. 
The  idea  of  banking,  it  is  most  evident,  never  came  into 
his  head.  A  majority  of  the  council,  of  which  the  pure 
minded  John  Jay  was  then  president,  passed  the  bill,  not- 
withstanding the  objections  of  the  chief  justice. 

Would  John  Jay  have  passed  a  bill  chartering  a  bank, 
which  he  must  have  known  had  passed  the  two  houses 
without  their  knowledge  that  it  contained  such  a  grant  ? 
I  do  not  believe  it.  It  will  not  be  forgotten  that  the  po- 
litical power  created  by  chartering  this  institution  was 
eventually  used  for  the  prostration  of  Col.  Burr  himself, 
and  his  immediate  friends.  Was  it  not  retributive  jus- 
tice ? 


32S  POLITICAL    HISTORY 

The  next  bank  chartered,  which  partook  of  a  party 
character,  was  the  New- York  State  Bank,  at  Albany. 

The  applicants  for  a  charter  for  this  institution  alleged 
that  the  bank  of  Albany  was  owned  by  federalists,  and 
that  its  power  was  wielded  in  such  manner  as  to  be  op- 
pressive to  those  business  men  who  belonged  to  the  repub- 
lican party.  They  further  alleged  that  the  public  conve- 
nience, and  the  interest  of  trade  and  commerce,  demanded 
another  bank  at  the  seat  of  government.  So  far,  all  was 
fair  on  the  part  of  the  applicants.  They  were  open  and 
frank  in  declaring  the  object  of  their  application,  and  the 
reasons  on  which  it  was  founded.  But,  as  proof  of  the 
monopolizing  and  greedy  spirit  of  men,  a  part  of  whose 
business  it  was  to  drive  bank  charters  through  the  legisla- 
ture, truth  compels  me  to  state  that  this  republican  com- 
pany had  connected  with  their  application  a  most  gigantic 
scheme  of  speculation,  if  not  of  peculation.  They  peti- 
tioned the  legislature  that,  in  the  same  act  by  which  the 
bank  was  to  be  chartered,  an  exclusive  grant  might  be 
made  to  them,  or  a  lease  might  be  given  them,  of  the  salt 
springs  in  the  state  for  a  long  time,  say  sixty  yearsj  the 
company  stipulating  that  salt  should  always  be  in  readi- 
ness, and  for  sale  at  the  salt  works  in  Salina,  at  a  price 
not  exceeding  Jive  shillings  per  bushel;  and  also  that  they 
would  pay  the  state  three  thousand  dollars  a  year  rent,  for 
the  first  ten  years;  three  thousand  and  five  hundred  dol- 
lars for  the  second  ten  years;  and  four  thousand  dollars 
annually  thereafter.  |  At  that  time  the  value  of  the  salt 
springs  was  not  generally  known  in  the  state,  and  the 
public  were  equally  ignorant  of  the  expense  of  manufactu- 
ring salt,  as  is  evident  from  the  offer  made  to  put  the 
maximum  price  at  five  shillings  for  the  same  quantity  of 
salt  which,  it  has  since  been  ascertained,  can  be  manufac- 
tured for  six  cents. 

Elkanah  Watson,  a  man  who  has  since  been  pretty  well 
X  Sec  Note  I. 


OF    NEW-YORK.  329 

known  in  the  state,  was  the  most  efficient  agent  of  this 
company,  and  there  is  still  extant,  and  will  be  found 
among  the  curious  documents  preserved  by  Doct.  Beck, 
in  the  Academy  at  Albany,  a  printed  scheme,  drawn  by  E. 
Watson,  of  the  mode  to  be  pursued  in  order  so  to  drill  the 
legislature  as  to  induce  them  to  pass  this  law.  No  doubt 
he,  and  some  others,  knew  well  the  value  to  the  state 
of  the  salt  springs.  The  petition  was  signed  by  John 
Tayler,  Elisha  Jenkins,  Thomas  Tillotson,  Ambrose  Spen- 
cer and  others,  and  was  presented  to  the  senate  and  refer- 
red to  Mr.  L'Homedieu  and  two  other  senators,  who 
reported  a  bill  granting  the  prayer  of  the  petitioners,  in- 
cluding the  exclusive  right  to  the  salt  springs  !  Some  of 
the  western  members,  who  foresaw  the  exorbitant  mono- 
poly which  a  lease  of  the  salt  works  for  a  long  term  of 
years  would  confer  on  the  company,  made  an  outcry  about 
it,  and  the  company  prudently  consented  to  strike  out  that 
provision  in  the  bill.  After  this  clause  was  stricken  out 
one  would  have  supposed  that  the  company  would  have 
been  sure  of  success  by  resting  upon  the  merits  of  the 
bill.  But  the  company,  before  their  petition  was  present- 
ed, had  agreed  on  a  dividend  of  stock  among  themselves, 
and  reserved  a  surplus  to  be  distributed  among  the  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature.  It  appears  from  the  affidavit  of 
Luther  Rich,  a  member  from  the  county  of  Otsego,  and 
several  other  affidavits,  that  assurances  were  given  that 
those  members  who  voted  for  the  bill  should  have  stock, 
with  a  further  assurance  that  the  stock  would  be  above 
par.  This  was  the  commencement  of  that  corrupt  prac- 
tice.*    I  have  taken  the  above  account  principally  from 

•  William  A.  Clark,  of  Orange  county,  who,  in  1803,  was  a  member  of  assembly, 
gave  me  a  different  account  of  the  manner  in  which  the  stock  of  the  State  Bank 
■was  distributed.  He  stated  that  the  applicants  founded  their  claim  to  a  charter 
upon  the  ground  that  it  should  be  a  republican  bank;  and  with  a  view,  as  wpn 
pretended,  to  insure  it  that  character,  they  agreed  that  each  republican  member 
Bliould  be  entitled  to  subscribe  for  a  given  number  of  shares,  and  that  this  privi- 


330  POLITICAL    HISTORY 

a  statement  signed  by  Doct.  Samuel  Stringer  and  James 
Van  Ingen,  as  chairman  and  secretary  of  a  public  meeting 
held  in  Albany,  in  the  spring  of  the  year  1803.  It  was, 
it  is  true,  a  party  meeting,  but  as  Doct.  Stringer  and  Mr. 
Van  Ingen  are  known  to  have  been  highly  respectable 
men,  I  cannot  belicA^e  they  would  venture  to  publish  any 
facts,  affecting  the  conduct  and  character  of  their  neigh- 
bors, which  they  did  not  know  existed.      [See  Note  T.] 

It  has  been  already  stated  that  before  the  State  Bank 
was  chartered,  a  joint  stock  company  had  been  formed  in 
the  city  of  New-York  for  the  purpose  of  banking,  upon 
principles  similar  to  the  association  of  the  company  which 
commenced  the  New-York  Bank  in  the  year  1784,  and 
that  a  like  company  had  also  been  formed  in  Albany,  by 
the  name  of  the  "  Mercantile  Company."  These  compa- 
nies applied  for  a  charter  at  the  same  time  with  the  com- 
pany which  composed  the  State  Bank.  They  alleged  that 
the  friends  of  the  latter  institution  had  agreed  to  support 
their  application;  but  the  State  Bank  by  some  means  got 
ahead  of  the  other  applications,  and  when  that  company 
had  obtained  their  charter,  some  of  its  supporters  fell  off, 
and  the  bills  to  charter  the  Merchant's  Bank  of  New- 
York,  and  Mercantile  Company  of  Albany,  failed  of  be- 
coming laws.  These  companies  therefore  charged  the 
friends  of  the  State  Bank  with  bad  faith. 

lege  was  secured  to  every  republican  member,  whether  he  voted  for  or  against  the 
bank.  But  this  does  not  varjr  the  corrupting  tendency  of  the  proposals  of  the  ap- 
plicants. Admit  that  such  was  the  fact,  and,  at  the  same  time,  admit,  what  un- 
doubtedly is  true,  that  it  was  well  known  that  the  shares  would  sell  in  market 
above  par,  and  it  required  but  an  indifferent  share  of  common  sense  for  any  mem- 
ber to  perceive  that  he  would  fail  in  realizing  any  benefit  from  the  stock  unless 
the  bank  was  chartered ;  which,  again,  could  not  be  done  unless  a  majority  of  the 
members  voted  for  it. 

A  story  was  put  in  circulation  about  Judge  Peck,  (then  a  member  of  the  assem- 
bly,) which  has  rather  too  much  the  appearance  of  fiction  to  be  entitled  to  credit, 
although  many,  even  at  this  day,  believe  it.  It  is  said  he  subscribed  for  rather  an 
unusual  number  of  shares — and  being  an  influential  member  it  is  not  improbable 
that  he  did  so,  if  he  subscribed  at  all— that  he  did  not  choose  to  subscribe  his  real 
name,  and  therefore  adopted  for  his  signature,  Jedediah  Bushi'l,  iastead  of  Jede- 
ftahPcck.      [See  Note  S.] 


OP    NEW-YORK.  331 

At  the  succeeding  session,  on  the  11th  of  April,  1804, 
instead  of  incorporating  these  joint  stock  companies,  the 
legislature  passed  the  celebrated  restraining  law,  by  which 
all  unincorporated  companies,  under  severe  penalties,  were 
prohibited  from  banking,  and  by  which  these  companies, 
although  they  had  invested  their  money  as  they  lawfully 
might  do,  under  the  existing  laws,  were  compelled  to 
wind  up  their  concerns. 

I  cannot  on  this  occasion  refrain  from  remarking,  that 
even  at  that  time  bank  paper  was  the  medium  through 
which  business  transactions  were  principally  conducted, 
and  the  precious  metals  had  ceased  to  be  the  circulating 
medium  in  the  state.  The  banks,  therefore,  in  point  of 
fact,  exercised  the  power  of  coining,  what  for  all  practical 
purposes  was  the  money  of  the  people. 

The  aggregate  of  capital  then  actually  invested  in  char 
tared  banks  in  the  state,  exclusive  of  the  capital  of  the 
Manhattan  Company,  did  not  at  that  period,  amount  to 
two  millions  of  dollars,  and  including  the  whole  nominal 
capital  of  the  Manhattan  Company,  did  not  exceed  four 
millions. 

Suppose  there  had  been  but  one  company,  and  this  four 
millionsjwhich  probably  in  fact  did  not  exceed  two  millions, 
had  been  held  by  such  company,  and  waving  any  restric- 
tions contained  in  the  United  States  constitution,  it  had 
been  proposed  to  grant  this  company  the  exclusive  right 
of  issuing  or  coining  money,  who  would  not  have  been 
alarmed  at  such  a  proposition  1  Such  in  effect  was  the 
restraining  law. 

It  may,  it  is  true,  be  necessary  for  special  and  peculiar 
reasons  to  grant  exclusive  privileges  to  an  individual,  or  to 
a  limited  number  of  individuals,  but  inasmuch  as  these 
grants  infringe  upon  the  equal  rights  of  all,  they  ought  not 
to  be  tolerated  except  for  reasons  the  most  cogent.  Be- 
cause every  grant   of  exclusive  rights   is  the  taking  pre- 


332  POLITICAL     HISTORY 

cisely  as  much  from  the  quantum  of  rights,  to  the  enjoy- 
ment of  which  the  whole  community  is  entitled,  as  is  thus 
exclusively  granted.  This  position  may  be  illustrated  by 
supposing  the  whole  community  to  consist  of  one  hundred 
persons,  and  that  they  jointly  own  one  thousand  dollars, 
if  then,  you  grant  to  an  individual,  exclusively,  one  hun- 
dred dollars  of  the  joint  funds  belonging  to  the  hundred 
associates,  there  will  remain  but  nine  hundred  dollars  of  the 
aggregate  funds  of  the  association. 

At  the  session  in  1805,  the  company  composing  the 
Merchants  Bank,  applied  for  a  charter.  The  application 
was  based  on  the  ground  that  more  banking  capital  was  re- 
quired to  facilitate  commercial  and  other  business  in  New- 
York,  and  that  having  invested  their  capital  for  banking 
purposes,  when  by  law  they  had  a  right  so  to  use  it,  and 
having  incurred  considerable  expense  in  the  prosecution 
of  their  objects,  they  claimed  from  the  justice  of  the  le- 
gislature either  an  act  of  incorporation  or  the  privilege  of 
using  their  money  in  the  manner  they  were  by  law  author- 
rised  to  do  when  they  incurred  those  expenditures.  These 
grounds  would  seem  to  entitle  them  to  some  relief.  But 
the  leading  representatives  in  New-York,  among  whom 
De  Witt  Clinton  was  the  most  efficient,  (some  of  whom 
being  largely  interested  in,  and  directors  of,  the  Manhattan 
Company,)  and  also,  several  of  the  most  influential  re- 
publicans of  Albany,  at  the  head  of  whom  were  John 
Tayler  and  Judge  Spencer,  and  who,  by  the  bye,  were 
deeply  interested  in  the  State  Bank,  warmly  opposed  this 
application.  They  did  not  ostensibly  oppose  it  because 
the  increase  of  banks  would  diminish  the  profits  of  exist- 
ing institutions,  but  because  they  alleged  that  the  public 
interest  did  not  require  an  additional  bank  in  the  city  of 
New-Yorkj  and  because,  as  they  asserted,  the  granting  of 
the  application  would  be  injurious  to  the  republican  party. 
Hence,  their  papers,  the   American    Citizen,  and  Albany 


OF    NEW-YORK.    •  333 

Register,  were  made  to  announce  that  the  applicants  were 
**  federalists  and  tories,"  and  urge  that  as  a  reason  why 
the  republican  members  ought  not  to  listen  to  the  appli- 
cation. 

The  applicants  finding  they  were  resisted  for  reasons 
exclusively  of  a  party  character,  which  assuredly  was 
wrong,  resorted  to  measures  still  more  unjustifiable  than 
those  taken  by  their  opponents,  to  secure  the  granting  of 
their  charter.  Isaac  Kibbe,  a  Burrite  of  some  distinction, 
was  appointed  their  agent.  Through  him,  and  through 
Ebenezer  Purdy  of  the  senate,  it  afterwards  appeared  that 
corrupt  offers  had  been  made  to  members  of  the  legisla- 
ture if  they  would  vote  for  incorporating  the  Merchants 
Bank.  The  few  federal  members  who  then  belonged  to 
the  senate,  voted  for  it.  With  them,  Messrs.  Purdy, 
Savage,  Hogeboom,  Burt  and  other  republican  members 
voted,  so  as  to  make  up  the  number  of  fifteen  ayes 
There  were  twelve  noes. 

When  the  bill  came  into  the  assembly,  it  was  taken  in 
charge  principally  by  William  W.  Van  Ness,  then  a  federal 
member  from  the  county  of  Columbia.  After  some  proceed- 
ings upon  it  were  had  in  that  body,  and  after  a  question  had 
been  taken  on  the  first  clause  in  the  bill,  which  was  adopted 
by  a  majority  of  votes,  a  complaint  was  made,  that  the  com- 
pany had,  by  their  agents,  attempted  to  bribe  some  of  the 
members  of  both  houses;  and  a  committee  was  appointed 
to  inquire  into  the  truth  of  the  charge,  consisting  of  Gil- 
bert of  New-York;  Livingston,  German,  Mclntyre,  Ar- 
cularius,  Sylvester  and  Lush.  On  the  motion  of  one  of 
the  federal  members,  the  committee,  after  considerable 
debate  were  instructed  to  inquire  if  any  corrupt  means  had 
been  used  by  these  and  other  applicants  for  bank  charters, 
by  which  it  was  no  doubt  intended  to  inquire  into  the 
means  used  by  the  State  Bank  to   obtain  its  charter;  but 


334  POLITICAL     HISTORY 

it  does  not  appear  that  this  branch  of  the  inquiry  was 
undertaken  by  the  committee. 

Upon  investigation  it  appeared  that  the  applicants  had 
offered  John  Ballard,  Gurdon  Huntington  and  Peter  Belts, 
members  of  the  legislature,  if  they  would  vote  for  the 
bank,  the  right  of  subscribing  for  a  given  number  of 
shares,  with  a  guarantee  that  those  shares  should  be 
purchased  of  them  at  an  advance  of  twenty-five  per  cent. 
It  also  appeared  that  Purdy  had  offered  the  right  to 
Stephen  Thorn,  a  senator,  to  subscribe  for  thirty  shares, 
and  promised  to  advance  him  five  pounds  in  cash  for  each 
share,  and  also  that  he  had  assailed  Obadiah  German,  an 
influential  member  of  the  assembly,  with  great  importu- 
nity, promising  to  him  fifty  shares,  with  a  guaranty 
that  if  he  chose  to  sell  them,  he  should  make  in 
clear  profit  one  thousand  dollars.  These  facts  appeared 
from  the  depositions  of  Ballard,  Huntington,  Betts,  Thorn 
and  German.  But  notwithstanding  these  palpable  proofs 
of  attempts  at  corruption,  and  the  almost  irresistible  in- 
ference that  some  of  the  members  who  voted  for  the  bank 
bad  been  tampered  with,  and  refused  to  disclose  the  cor- 
rupt offers  which  had  been  made  to  them,  and  which  they 
had  accepted,  the  vote  in  favor  of  the  bill  on  its  final 
passage  in  the  assembly,  was  stronger  than  the  vote  on  its 
enacting  clause.  Of  the  proceedings  in  the  council  of 
revision  I  have  already  given  an  account. 

Cheetham,  in  the  American  Citizen,  had  charged  the 
senate  with  corruption  in  the  passage  of  the  law  incorpo- 
rating the  Merchants  Bank,  and  the  senate,  on  motion  of 
Mr.  Van  Vechten,  instructed  the  attorney  general  to  pro- 
secute him  for  the  libel.  Subsequently  the  attorney 
general,  Mr.  Woodworth,  in  obedience  to  the  resolution, 
caused  the  alleged  libel  to  be  submitted  to  a  grand  jury 
of  New-York,  but  they  refused  to  find  a  bill      This  aflfords 


OF    NEW- YORK.  335 

pretty  decisive  evidence  of  what  public  opinion  was  in 
that  city. 

During  the  proceedings  in  the  legislature  upon  the  bill 
in  question,  much  accrimony  among  the  members  was  ex- 
cited. So  heated  did  Judge  Taylor  and  Judge  Purdy 
become,  that  the  former  committed  a  personal  assault  upon 
the  latter,  by  knocking  him  down  as  he  was  passing 
from  the  senate  chamber,  and  almost  within  the  bar  of  the 
senate.  What  effect  these  collisions  had  on  political  par- 
ties I  have  noticed  in  another  place.    [See  JVote  B.] 

No  other  applications  for  bank  charters  were  made, 
which  were  seriously  pressed  until  the  year  1812,  when 
the  Bank  of  America  was  incorporated.  I  have  hereto- 
fore alluded  to  the  disgusting  scenes,  which,  in  the  pro- 
gress of  that  application  were  exhibited.  From  the  affi- 
davits of  Silas  Holmes,  Nathaniel  Cobb,  Bennett  Bicknell, 
A.  C.  Comstock  and  Isaac  Ogden,  all  members  of  the  le- 
gislature, which  will  be  found  at  large  on  the  journals  of 
the  house  of  assembly  for  1812,  it  is  evident  that  the 
most  shameless  attempts  were  made  to  corrupt  the  mem- 
bers, and  there  is  too  much  reason  to  believe  that  in 
some  instances,  those  attempts  were  successful.  One  is 
pained  and  sickened  at  the  evidence  these  depositions 
afford  of  the  degeneracy  of  human  nature.  John  Mar- 
tin, the  preacher  whom  I  have  mentioned  as  a  sub-agent 
of  the  bank,  was  convicted  of  attempting  to  bribe  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature,  contrary  to  the  statute  of  1806, 
and  sentenced  to  confinement  in  the  state  prison.  I  have 
before  alluded  to  the  trial  of  Mr.  Southwick,  for  an  at- 
tempt to  bribe  Mr.  Speaker  Sheldon,  and  I  shall  not  now 
take  up  the  time  of  the  reader  by  relating  the  particulars 
which  were  disclosed  in  relation  to  the  disgraceful  trans- 
actions connected  with  the  incorporation  of  this  insti- 
tution j  but  shall  merely  as  a  specimen  of  the  mode  of  man- 
agement by  the  bank  agents,  give  a  summary  of  the  testi- 


336  POLITICAL   HISTOETf 

mony  of  Casper  M.  Rouse,  a  senator  elected  from  the 
county  of  Chenango  on  the  Clintonian  ticket  in  April, 
1811,  against  Gen.  Thomas.  I  have  before  stated  that 
Gen.  Thomas,  as  the  agent  of  the  bank  applicants,  in  the 
fall  of  1811,  went  on  a  mission  through  the  southern  and 
■western  counties.  Mr.  Rouse  says,  that  Gen.  Thomas,  in 
the  latter  part  of  October,  or  first  of  November,  came  to 
Norwich  where  he  resided,  and  sought  and  obtained  a 
private  interview  with  him.  Gen.  Thomas  commenced 
by  saying  that  a  scheme  of  the  Lewisites  and  Martling 
men,  (a  party  to  whom  he  knew  Mr.  Rouse  was  opposed,) 
had  been  formed  for  procuring  a  charter  to  another 
bank  in  New-York;  and  that  an  application  would  also  be 
made  to  charter  the  Bank  of  America.  That  if  that  bank 
was  incorporated.  Rouse  should  have  ten  shares  in  it. 
Rouse  then  stated  that  he  had  not  a  favorable  opinion  of 
banks,  and  besides  he  had  no  money  to  invest  in  bank 
stock.  To  which  Gen.  Thomas  replied,  that  if  he  did  not 
wish  to  keep  the  stock  he  would  pledge  his  honor  that  he, 
(R.)  should  realize  one  thousand  dollars  clear  profits  from 
the  shares.  It  does  not  appear  that  Mr.  Rouse  gave  the 
General  any  definitive  answer,  and  Thomas  left  him 
with  a  request  that  he  would  call  on  Mr.  Southwick  as 
soon  as  he  sould  arrive  in  Albany,  when  he  went  there 
to  take  his  seat  as  a  member  of  the  senate.  I  seems 
Rouse  did  not  call  on  Southwick,  nor  did  he  vote  for  the 
bank,  but  about  the  middle  of  March,  when  the  bank 
agents  became  alarmed  for  fear  of  an  explosion,  Mr.  John 
Van  Ness  Yates,  on  Sunday,  called  on  Mr.  Rouse,  and 
requested  him  to  call  and  see  Gen.  Thomas.  He  did  so, 
when  he,  the  General,  asked  him  if  he  had  divulged  the 
conversation  which  took  place  at  Norwich,  and  Rouse  an- 
swered that  he  had  not.  Thomas  earnestly  requested  him 
not  to  do  so,  and  told  him,  that  although  he  had  or  should 
vote  against   the  bank,  he  should  have  his  one  thousand 


OF   NEW-YORK.  337 

dollars.  It  is  hardly  possible  to  suppose  that  this  state- 
ment, verified  by  the  oath  of  senator  Rouse,  was  in  sub- 
stance false.  What  possible  motive  could  he  have  had 
for  committing  so  foul  a  perjury  1  If  the  story  of  Rouse 
was  substantially  true,  can  there  be  a  doubt  of  the  guilt 
of  Gen.  Thomas? 

It  is  proper,  however,  to  add,  in  justice  to  the  memory 
of  Mr.  Thomas,  that  Rouse  voted  for  him  as  treasurer  in 
February,  in  preference  to  Mr.  Lansing,  and  that  Gen. 
Thomas  published  an  affidavit  voluntarily  made  by  him 
contradicting  the  material  facts  sworn    to  by  Mr.  Rouse. 

No  other  very  serious  collisions  arose  upon  the  char- 
tering of  banks  under  the  old  constitution.  The  odium 
attached  to  all  those  implicated  in  the  corrupt  means  used 
to  promote  the  incorporation  of  the  Bank  of  America, 
was  so  great  and  so  lasting  that  no  attempts  of  the  kind 
were  made  for  a  long  while  afterwards^  and  the  iniquitous 
proceedings  of  former  legislatures  in  relation  to  granting 
charters  to  moneyed  institutions,  had  been  so  disgraceful 
to  the  state,  and  were  so  fresh  in  the  recollection  of  the 
members  of  the  convention  of  1821,  as,  beyond  all  ques- 
tion, induced  them,  with  a  view  to  the  prevention  of  these 
practices,  to  insert  the  clause  in  the  present  constitution 
which  renders  necessary  the  assent  of  two-thirds  of 
both  houses  of  the  legislature  in  order  to  incorporate  a 
moneyed  institution.  The  intention  of  the  convention 
was  good,  but  the  clause  failed  to  accomplish  the  object 
intended.  Witness  the  proceedings  in  passing  the  law  to 
incorporate  the  Chemical  Bank,  and  other  institutions,  in 
1825.  The  only  effect  of  the  restrictive  clause  in  the 
constitution  has  been  to  increase  the  evil,  by  rendering 
necessary  a  more  extended  system  of  corruption,  in  some 
form,  than  was  before  indispensable. 

Since  the  disclosures  of  1825,  no  direct  evidence  of  cor- 
ruption, as  a  means  of  procuring  bank  charters,  has  been 

22 


338  POLITICAL    HISTORY 

furnished — but  that  power  of  the  legislature,  guarded  as 
it  has  been  by  the  restraining  law,  has  in  latter  years  been 
exercised  for  rewarding  the  services  of  political  partisans; 
a  practice,  which,  when  viewed  in  all  its  consequences, 
is  more  dangerous  than  that  pursued  by  the  applicants  for 
the  Bank  of  America.  In  the  one  case,  the  applicants 
corrupted  those  to  whom  the  people  had  delegated  power; 
in  the  other,  the  very  source  of  power  is  intended  to  be 
corrupted — in  the  one,  the  legislature  were  corrupted  by 
the  applicants;  in  the  other,  the  legislature  corrupted  the 
people. 

I  will  dismiss  this  subject  after  submitting  one  or  two 
remarks. 

In  my  judgment,  at  the  time  the  Manhattan  Bank  was 
chartered,  an  additional  bank  was  required  in  the  city  of 
New-York;  and  further,  I  believe  that  the  applications  to 
incorporate  the  State  Bank,  the  Merchants  Bank,  and  the 
Bank  of  America,  were  meritorious,  and  ought,  standing 
on  their  own  merits,  to  have  been  granted,  and  that  the 
error  consisted  in  permitting  those  interested  in  banks  to 
make  a  political  question  of  a  matter  not  properly  such, 
with  a  view  to  subserve  their  own  individual  interests.  * 

That  if  banking  is  properly  regulated,  as  it  is  under 
the  safety  fund  law  the  multiplication  of  banks  to  any 
reasonable  extent,  can  have  no  other  effect  than  that  of 
diminishing  the  profits  of  existing  banks,  and  even  if 
banks  are  multiplied  so  as  to  render  money  invested  in 
them  unproductive,  no  serious  evil  can  ensue;  for  the  stock- 
holders can,  beyond  a  doubt,  at  any  time  pay  back  to  each 
one  his  share  of  the  capital,  and  on  payment  of  the  lia- 
bilities, invest  their  money  in  some  more  profitable  busi- 
ness. 

That  the  question  arising  on  the  chartering  of  a  bank, 
therefore  is  not  political,  but  is  a  question  affecting  princi- 
pally the  stockholders  of  existing  banks,  and  those  who 
*  See  ^fote  U. 


OF    NEW-YORK.  339 

v/ish  to  become  stockholders;  and  that,  therefore,  the  real 
question  is,  or  rather  was  before  the  passage  of  the  free 
banking  law,  between  monopolists  and  those  who  desire 
to  become  monopolizers.* 

That  such  a  heartless  controversy  should  repeatedly 
have  convulsed  and  broken  up  great  political  parties,  that 
it  should  in  its  progress  have  blasted  the  prospects  and 
destroyed  the  usefulness  of  so  many  talented,  and  in  other 
respects  worthy  citizens,  and  finally,  that  it  should  have 
marred  the  character  for  purity  of  our  state  legislature, 
and  fixed  an  indelible  and  enduring  stain  upon  the  repu- 
tation of  the  empire  state,  is  deeply  to  be  deplored. 

•  The  question  lespecting  chartering  a  national  bank  inTolves  other  and  Tory 
diflerent  considerations. 


340  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1812. 

CHAPTER   XVIII. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1812,  TO  MAY  1,  1813. 

Shortly  after  the  peace  of  1783,  a  society  was  formed 
in  the  city  of  New- York,  known  by  the  name  of  the  Tam- 
many Society.  It  was  probably,  originally  instituted  with 
a  view  of  organizing  an  association  antagonist  to  the  Cin- 
cinnati Society.  That  society  was  said  to  be  monarchical 
or  rather  aristocratical  in  its  tendency,  and,  when  first 
formed,  and  before  its  constitution  was  amended,  on  the 
suggestion  of  General  Washington  and  other  original 
members,  it  certainly  did  tend  to  the  establishment  of  an 
hereditary  order,  something  like  an  order  of  nobility. 
The  Tammany  Society  originally  seems  to  have  had  in 
view  the  preservation  of  our  democratic  institutions,  as  far 
as  possible,  from  contamination  by  the  adoption  of  any  of 
the  aristocratic  principles  which  were  connected  with  the 
governments  of  the  old  world. 

A  sketch  of  the  prominent  features,  and  of  the  history 
of  the  Tammany  Association,  has  been  kindly  furnished 
me  by  an  old  and  highly  respectable  citizen  of  New-York, 
the  Hon.  Judah  Hammond,  which,  without  having  obtained 
his  express  permission,  I  take  leave  to  insert: — 

"  Tammany  Society,  or  Columbian  Order,  was  founded 
by  William  Mooney,  an  upholsterer  residing  in  the  city 
of  New-York,  some  time  in  the  administration  of  President 
Washington.  The  institution  takes  its  name  from  the 
celebrated  Indian  Chief  Tammany,  whose  attachment  to 
liberty  was  greater  than  his  love  of  life.  It  has  a  Grand 
Sachem  and  thirteen  sachems,  in  imitation  of  the  president 
and  governors  of  the  states,  at  the  time  it  was  founded;  a 
secretary,  a   sagamore,    the    master    of  ceremonies,  and  a 


1812.]  OF   KEw-yoRK.  341 

wiskinkie,  the  door-keeper j  a  grand  council,  of  which 
the  grand  sachem  and  the  other  sachems  are  members. 
The  father  of  the  council  is  the  presiding  officerj  the 
scribe  records  the  proceedings  of  the  council.  The  laws 
mention  the  council  fire,  the  calumet,  or  pipe  of  peace, 
and  the  tomahawk,  which  they  bury  when  the  pipe  is 
smoked.  It  dates  from  two  eras,  the  discovery  of  America 
by  Columbus,  and  the  founding  of  the  institution.  It  di- 
vides the  year  into  seasons,  as  the  season  of  snow,  the 
the  season  of  blossoms,  the  season  of  fruits.  The  twelfth 
day  of  May  is  kept  as  its  anniversary. 

"  William  Mooney  was  one  of  those  who,  at  that  early 
day,  regarded  the  powers  of  the  general  government  as 
dangerous  to  the  independence  of  the  state  governments, 
and  to  the  common  liberties  of  the  people.  His  object 
was  to  fill  the  country  with  institutions  designed,  and  men 
determined,  to  preserve  the  just  balance  of  power.  His 
purpose  was  patriotic  and  purely  republican.  The  con- 
stitution provided  by  his  care,  contained,  among  other 
things,  a  solemn  asseveration,  which  every  member  at  his 
initiation  was  required  to  repeat  and  subscribe,  that  he 
would  sustain  the  state  institutions,  and  resist  a  consolida- 
tion of  power  in  the  general  government.  Tammany  was, 
at  first,  so  popular,  that  most  persons  of  merit  became 
members;  and  so  numerous  were  they  that  its  anniversary 
was  regarded  as  a  holiday. 

"  At  that  time  there  was  no  party  politics  mixed  up  in 
its  proceedings.  But  when  President  Washington,  in  the 
latter  part  of  his  administration,  rebuked  "  self  created 
societies,"  from  an  apprehension  that  their  ultimate  ten- 
dency would  be  hostile  to  the  public  tranquility,  the  mem- 
bers of  Tammany  supposed  their  institution  to  be  included 
in  the  reproof;  and  they  almost  all  forsook  it.  The  foun- 
der, William  Mooney,  and  a  few  others,  continued  stead- 
last.     At  one  anniversary  they  were  reduced  so  low  that 


342  POLITICAL    HISTORY  1812. 

but  three  persons  attended  its  festival.  From  this  tirae  it 
became  a  political  institution,  and  took  ground  with  Tho- 
mas Jefferson.  The  writer  of  this  article  joined  it  about 
the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  three.  At  the  time  of  his 
initiation  the  regular  meetings  were  ordinarily  attended 
by  about  ten  or  fifteen  members.  The  institution  gradu- 
ally increased  in  numbers,  and  made  a  great  rally  about 
the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  twelve,  in  support  of  presi- 
dent Madison's  administration,  and  to  secure  his  re-elec- 
tion in  that  year.  Five  hundred  new  members  were  initi- 
ated in  one  year,  and  there  was  a  great  return  of  old 
members  who  had  been  lax  in  their  attendance.  About 
the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  fourteen  I  ceased  to  be 
an  attending  member,  and  consequently  lost  sight  of  its 
internal  polity,  and  know  not  what  intestine  changes 
have  passed  upon  its  ancient  lineaments,  further  than 
these  are  discernible  in  its  public  policy." 

The  leaders  of  the  party  in  the  city  of  New-York, 
which  I  have  described  under  the  denomination  of  Mart- 
ling  men,  were  generally  members  of  this  society.  Thus 
organized,  they  were  enabled  to  act  with  prodigious  effect 
upon  the  democratic  party  in  the  city.  By  their  efforts, 
and  by  the  course  taken  by  Mr.  Clinton,  which  was  some- 
times, to  say  the  least,  indiscreet,  before  the  year  1813  an 
immense  majority  of  the  republicans  of  New-York  became 
decidedly  opposed  to  him;  and  the  united  influence  of  the 
democracy  of  that  great  city,  it  will  readily  be  perceived, 
was  calculated  to  have  a  considerable  influence  upon  the 
republican  party  in  the  state. 

The  Tammany  or  Martling  party  were  extremely  ap- 
prehensive, that  Mr.  Clinton's  standing  among  the  repub- 
lican members  of  the  legislature  from  the  country,  was 
still  such,  as  would  enable  him  to  induce  a  majority  of 
them  to  consent  to  his  re-nomination  as  lieutenant  gover- 
nor.    Under  these  impressions,  early  in  January  they  got 


1813.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  343 

up  a  meeting  in  the  city,  at  which  they  recommended  a 
state  convention  for  the  purpose  of  nominating  a  governor 
and  lieutenant  governor.  Of  this  meeting,  Jonathan 
Thompson,  afterwards  collector  of  the  port,  was  chairman, 
and  John  L.  Broome,  son  of  the  late  lieutenant  governor, 
was  secretary. 

About  this  time  a  new  paper,  which  was  understood  to 
be  the  organ  of  the  Tammany  party,  was  established  in 
New-York,  under  the  name  of  the  National  Advocate. 
Henry  Wheaton,  then  recently  from  Rhode  Island,  and 
since  well  known  as  a  man  of  distinguished  talents,  was 
its  editor. 

The  legislature  met  at  Albany  on  the  12th  of  January, 
and  on  the  same  day  chose  a  council  of  appointment. 
The  gentlemen  elected,  were  Peter  W.  Radcliflf  from  the 
southern,  James  W.Wilkin  from  the  middle,  John  Stearns 
from  the  eastern,  and  Jonas  Piatt  from  the  western  dis- 
tricts. All  of  these  gentlemen  were  federalists,  except 
Gen.  Wilkin,  who  was  elected  because  there  was  no  fede- 
ralist in  the  senate  from  the  middle  district. 

As  the  term  of  service  of  Gen.  John  Smith,  in  the  sen- 
ate of  the  United  States,  would  expire  on  the  4th  March, 
it  became  necessary  for  the  legislature  to  appoint  a  suc- 
cessor. 

It  has  been  stated  that  there  was  a  federal  majority  in 
the  assembly,  but  that  in  the  senate  the  republican  major- 
ity was  greater  than  the  federal  majority  in  the  assembly. 
It  was,  therefore,  fair  to  presume  that  a  republican  senator 
on  a  joint  ballot  would  be  chosen;  but  the  event  disap- 
pointed that  reasonable  anticipation.  Mr.  Rufus  King 
was  nominated  by  the  assembly  by  a  vote  of  fift)''-five  to 
forty-four,  and  Mr.  James  W.  Wilkin,  a  senator  from  Or- 
ange county,  was  chosen  by  the  senate.  Upon  a  joint 
ballot  Mr.  King  had  sixty-eight  votes  and  Gen.  Wilkin 
sixty-one.     There  were  thrpe  blank  votes.     What  was 


344  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1813. 

the  cause  of  this  result  1  By  the  Tammany  party  it  was 
charged  to  Mr.  Clinton.  They  alleged  that  this  was  the 
consideration  for  which  the  federalists,  in  November,were 
induced  to  give  the  Clintonians  the  presidential  electors. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  republicans  who  had  supported 
Mr.  Clinton  insisted,  that  it  was  the  result  of  a  bargain 
made  by  Gen.  Thomas  and  Mr.  Southwick,  by  which  they 
agreed,  that  if  the  federalists,  as  a  body,  would  vote  for 
the  incorporation  of  a  bank,  they  would  secure  to  the  fed- 
eral party  the  election  of  the  next  senator;  and  there  is  a 
fact  within  my  knowledge  which  induces  me  to  believe 
that  the  latter  supposition  is  the  more  probable. 

In  the  year  1817,  when  Mr.  Clinton  was  a  candidate 
for  nomination  for  the  office  of  governor,  by  the  republi- 
can members  of  the  legislature,  this  charge  was  brought 
against  him.  Gen.  Wilkin  was  then  a  member  of  con- 
gress and  at  Washington.  I  was  there  also.  Mr.  Clinton 
addressed  to  me  a  letter  stating  that  a  report  was  in  circu- 
lation charging  him  and  his  friends  with  having,  in  pursu- 
ance of  a  previous  agreement,  combined  to  defeat  the  elec- 
tion of  Gen.  Wilkin  to  the  senate  of  the  United  States, 
and  requesting  me  to  call  on  him  and  obtain  his  contra- 
diction of  it.  I  did  so;  and  Gen.  Wilkin  addressed  to  me 
a  letter,  which  I  forwarded  to  Mr.  Clinton,  and  which  is 
probably  now  among  his  papers,  in  which  Gen.  W.  de- 
clared his  utter  disbelief  in  any  foundation  for  the  report. 
He  was  convinced,  he  said,  that  his  election  was  defeated 
by  the  influence  and  votes  of  the  friends  of  the  bank.* 
Besides,  it  would  have  been  so  vile  an  act  of  treachery  in 
Mr.  Clinton  to  sacrifice  so  constant  and  steady  a  friend  as 
Mr.  Wilkin,  and  the  man  who  had  been  president  of  the 
legislative  caucus  which  nominated  him  for  the  presidency, 

•  As  an  act  of  justice  to  Mr.  King,  it  is  proper  to  state  that  no  individual  of  any 
partjr  ever  suspected  that  he  was  a  party  to,  or  had  knowledge  of,  any  negotia> 
tion  either  with  the  Clintonians  or  the  bank  men. 


1813.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  345 

that  so  heinous  a  charge  ought  not  to  be  sustained  or  tole- 
rated without  strong  and  positive  proof.  I  am,  however, 
inclined  to  believe  that  the  knowing  ones  in  the  republican 
party  had  made  some  discoveries  by  which  they  had  rea- 
son to  believe  that  the  chances  of  success  in  the  election 
of  a  republican  senator,  was,  to  say  the  least,  very  dubi- 
ous. The  office  was  a  desirable  one  to  men  of  the  first 
talents  and  standing  in  the  statej  and  Gen.  Wilkin,  though 
a  perfectly  amiable  and  very  upright  man,  had  not  that 
high  standing  and  powerful  influence  in  the  party  which 
several  other  republicans  in  the  state  had;  and,  it  seems 
to  me,  that  had  they  been  sure  that  a  republican  senator 
would  have  been  elected,  a  sharper  competition  for  the 
office  would  have  been  exhibited,  and  probably  some  other 
person  would  have  been  nominated. 

In  August,  1812,  the  attorney  general,  M.  B.  Hildreth, 
died,  and  Thomas  Addis  Emmett,  the  celebrated  Irish  ad- 
vocate, was  appointed  his  successor.  The  misfortunes, 
persecution  and  sufferings  of  that  great  and  good  man  in 
his  native  country,  the  purity  of  character  and  exalted 
virtue  he  evinced,  and  the  splendid  triumph  he  deserved 
and  obtained  in  his  adopted  country,  are  well  known;  but 
his  wonderful  powers  of  mind,  his  transcendent  talents, 
and  his  unrivalled  eloquence  as  an  advocate,  will  not  be 
known  to  posterity,  because  all  those  who  heard  him  and 
felt  the  powers  of  his  mighty  intellect,  (and  none  but  such 
can  form  an  adequate  idea  of  his  merits  and  superiority 
over  all  other  men,)  will  soon  follow  him  to  the  tomb. 
Mr.  Emmett  did  not  seek  the  office.  The  state  adminis- 
tration invited  him  to  accept  it,  and  I  apprehend  the  espe- 
cial reason  of  their  doing  so  was  that  they  might  avail 
themselves  of  his  talents  on  the  trial  of  Thomas  and 
Southwick. 

The  last  act  of  the  council  which  was  chosen  in  the  year 
I812,was  their  best  act.  On  the  14th  January , they  appoint- 


346  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1813. 

ed  Gideon  Hawley,  Esq.  under  the  law  passed  by  the  last 
legislature  for  the  better  organization  of  schools,  superin- 
tendent of  common  schools.  Mr.  Hawley  was  then  a 
young  lawyer  resident  in  Albany,  of  habits  indefatigably 
industrious,  modest  and  retiring,  but  possessing  great  be- 
nevolence of  heart,  vigorous  intellectual  powers,  and  high 
literary  attainments.  For  the  paltry  salary  of  three  hun- 
dred dollars  a  year,  he  perfected  a  system  for  the  manage- 
ment of  the  school  fundj  the  organization  of  every  neigh- 
borhood in  this  great  state  into  school  districts;  for  a  fair 
and  equal  distribution  of  the  bounty  of  the  state  into  every 
district;  and  he  devised  a  plan  of  operations  by  which 
this  vast  machinery  could  be  moved  and  managed  by  a 
single  individual.  The  state  have  never  rewarded  him  for 
his  labors,  but  posterity  will,  it  is  believed,  do  justice  to 
his  merits,  his  services  and  his  character.  If  the  man  who 
invents  the  means  of  improving  the  working  of  inani- 
mate machinery,  in  controlling  its  power,  or  in  chang- 
ing the  face  of  the  globe  by  artificial  water  commu- 
nications, be,  as  he  truly  is,  entitled  to  the  gratitude  of  his 
fellow  beings,  what  meed  of  praise  does  that  individual 
deserve  who  efficiently  aids  in  pouring  a  flood  of  light  on 
the  human  intellect,  and  adding  indefinitely  to  the  mass 
of  mind  1 

The  federal  council  met  for  the  first  time  on  the 
the  eighth  day  of  February.  A  difference  of  views  among 
the  then  federal  members,  was  disclosed  in  the  first  ap- 
pointment which  was  made.  Gen.  Piatt  moved  the  re- 
appointment of  De  Witt  Clinton  as  mayor  of  New-York, 
and  to  this  appointment  Mr.  RadclifF  objected.  A  majo- 
rity however,  voted  in  favor  of  the  appointment,  and  it 
was  effected,  but  Mr.  RadclifF  caused  his  dissent  to  be  en- 
tered on  the  minutes  of  the  council.  The  particular  cause 
of  Mr.  RadcliflTs  dissent  was,  that  in  1810,  his  brother, 
Jacob  RadclifF,  (formerly  a  judge  of  the  supreme   court,) 


1813.]  OF   NEW-YOKK.  347 

had  by  the  Robert  Williams  council  been  made  mayor  in 
place  of  Mr.  Clinton,  and  in  the  succeeding  year  had  been 
compelled  to  give  place  to  Mr.  Clinton.  The  dissent  there- 
fore, of  Mr.  Radcliffmay  have  been  caused  more  by  fraternal 
affection  than  the  amor  patrice.  But  what  could  induce 
Gen.  Piatt  to  have  taken  a  course  on  this  single  appoint- 
ment, which  he  must  have  foreseen  would  produce  a 
state  of  feeling,  that  would  embarrass  their  proceedings  at 
that  critical  juncture  of  the  fortunes  of  the  federal  party, 
through  the  remainder  of  the  time  in  which  that  council 
would  exist  1 

Mr.  Piatt,  who  at  this  time  may  be  regarded  as  the 
most  influential  man  in  the  federal  party,  was  a  lawyer 
who  had  been  in  extensive  practice,  and  though  his  talents 
were  not  brilliant,  they  were  of  a  character  highly  respec- 
table; his  morals  were  perfectly  pure;  though  he  possessed 
a  deep  and  intense  tone  of  feeling,  and  a  high  sense  of 
personal  honor,  he  had  acquired,  apparently,  an  entire 
control  over  his  passions;  his  quiet  and  calm  deportment 
indicated  a  contemplative  and  considerate  mind,  not  lia- 
ble to  be  hurried  into  the  adoption  of  ill-adjusted  plans,  or 
to  determinations  which  might  lead  to  actions  indiscreet 
or  ill  advised.  His  address  was  unobtrusive,  modest  and 
conciliatory.  He  had  a  high  regard  to  courtesy  and  pro- 
priety, as  well  in  respect  to  political  conduct  as  in  the 
private  and  social  concerns  of  life.  He  and  other  leaders 
of  the  federal  party  in  New- York,  had  within  a  few 
months  past,  recommended  to  their  political  friends  in  the 
other  states  of  the  union  to  support  Mr.  Clinton  for  the 
first  office  in  the  nation.  Since  that  support  had  been 
given  in  pursuance  of  such  recommendation,  no  man  could 
pretend  that  Mr.  Clinton  had  done  anything  to  lessen  him 
in  the  estimation  of  the  federalists.  In  what  light  then 
would  Gen.  Piatt  and  his  friends  in  this  state  appear  to 
their  friends  abroad,  and  to  the  American  public  in  gene- 


348  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1813. 

ral,  were  they  to  refuse  to  re-appoint,  and  were  they,  in 
effect,  to  remove  from  the  comparatively  petty  office  of 
mayoralty  of  New-York,  (an  office,  the  duties  of  which  it 
is  universally  admitted  Mr.  Clinton  had  discharged  with 
great  ability  and  to  the  entire  satisfaction  of  the  citizens,) 
a  man  whom  they  had  so  recently  recommended  as  fitted 
for  the  office  of  president  of  the  United  States  *? 

This  consideration  alone,  must  have  had  a  powerful  ef- 
fect on  the  mind  of  Gen.  Piatt;  while  it  seems  not  at  all 
to  have  reached  the  sensibilities  of  his  colleague  of  the 
southern  district.  But  there  were  other  considerations, 
which,  no  doubt,  bore  with  great  force  on  the  minds  of 
Mr.  Piatt  and  Mr.  Stearns. 

From  the  course  of  conduct  of  Gov.  Tompkins,  Judge 
Spencer  and  Mr.  Tayler,  towards  Mr.  Clinton,  for  the 
year  past,  they  had  reason  to  anticipate  what  eventually 
took  place,  that  he  would  oppose  the  re-election  of  Gov. 
Tompkins.  Is  it  not  probable  that  they  had  direct  as- 
surances to  that  effect?  They  no  doubt  mistook  and  over- 
rated the  influence  of  Mr.  Clinton  among  his  republican 
friends.  In  aid  of  that  delusion,  they  already  learned 
that  some  of  his  most  prominent  friends,  as  the  Van 
Cortlands,  Gen.  German,  and  sundry  other  distinguished 
men  were  in  advance  of  Mr.  Clinton  in  denouncing  Gov. 
Tompkins,  Judge  Spencer,  &c.,  but  they  did  not  know, 
or  if  they  knew,  they  did  not  properly  appreciate  the 
principles  which  had  influened  the  rank  and  file  men  of 
the  republican  party  who  had  supported  Mr.  Clinton  for 
the  presidency.  Of  the  principles  which  governed  this 
by  far  the  most  numerous  class  of  Mr.  Clinton's  re- 
publican friends,  I  shall  have  occasion  to  speak  in  another 
place. 

For  the  reasons  which  I  have  assigned.  Gen.  Piatt 
would  not  consent  to  gratify  the  ardent  desires  of  Mr. 
Radcliff,  by  the  appointment  of  his  brother  as  mayor  of 


1813.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  349 

New- York,  to  the  exclusion  of  Mr.  Clinton.  Mr.  Rad- 
clifF  took  honor  to  himself  for  being  a  federalist  of  the 
old  school,  one  of  the  leading  maxims  of  that  school  be- 
ing, to  wage  a  perpetual  war  against  every  man  who  had 
appeared  in  the  ranks  against  them,  however  effectually 
his  political  views  and  principles  might  have  changed. 
A  most  reasonable  and  sagacious  policy  for  the  govern- 
ment of  a  party  in  the  minority,  who  are  struggling  to 
regain  power.  Mr.  Radcliff,  by  his  conduct  in  this  coun- 
cil, lost  the  confidence  of  his  political  friends,  which  he 
never  afterwards  regained. 

The  council  met  again  on  the  13th  of  February,  when 
Mr.  Piatt  moved  that  Thomas  Addis  Emmett  be  removed 
from  the  office  of  attorney  general.  On  this  question  Mr. 
Radcliff  refused  to  vote,  but  Mr.  Stearns  voting  for  the 
resolution,  although  Mr.  Wilkin  and  the  Governor  voted 
against  it,  it  was  declared  carried;  no  doubt  on  the  ground, 
that  by  the  constitution  the  governor  had  a  casting  vote 
only,  and  that  here  could  be  no  tie,  two  members  of  the 
council  voting  for  and  only  one  against  the  motion.  As 
Mr.  Radcliff  refused  to  vote  he  was  regarded  as  absent. 

It  was  now  evident  that  Mr.  Radcliff  was  determined 
to  embarrass  the  proceedings  of  the  council,  for  Mr.  Em- 
mett was  one  of  the  most  ardent  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton; 
and  if  Mr.  R..  as  a  federalist  of  the  old  school,  was  war- 
ring against  Clintonians,  why  should  he  refuse  to  vote 
on  the  question  of  Mr.  Emmett's  removal  1  The  'office 
of  attorney  general  having  become  vacant  by  the  removal 
of  Mr.  Emmett,  Mr.  Van  Vechten  was  appointed  in  his 
place. 

It  is  probable  that  Mr.  Piatt  found  that  his  federal 
friends  would  not  be  satisfied,  if  the  council  continued  the 
Clintonians  in  office.  They  also  held  to  the  maxim  long 
afterwards  announced,  that  "  to  the  victors  belong  the 
spoils;"   for   I   perceive    that   the   Clintonians  in   New- 


350  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1813. 

York,  who  filled  some  of  the  most  lucrative  offices  in  the 
city,  were  nearly  all  removed  and  federalists  appointed  in 
their  places.  Among  these  were  Gerrit  Gilbert,  son  of 
Senator  Gilbert,  who  was  removed  from  the  office  of  clerk 
of  the  city  and  county,  and  P.  C.  Van  Wyck,  from  the 
office  of  recorder.  Mr.  Piatt  moved  for  the  displacing  of 
Mr.  Van  Wyck,  and  his  motion  was  adopted  by  the  votes 
of  the  three  federal  councillors.  He  then  nominated  J. 
O.  Hoffman  for  a  successor.  Mr.  Radcliff  nominated  Ca- 
leb S.  Riggs,  ?>.  federalist  of  the  old  school ^  but  Mr.  Hoff- 
man was  appointed  by  the  votes  of  Piatt,  Stearns  and 
Wilkin.  Mr.  Radcliff  moved  the  removal  of  Sylvanus 
Miller  from  the  office  of  surrogate,  and  the  appointment 
of  Peter  Hawes  in  his  place.  Mr.  Piatt  objected  to  the 
form  of  the  motion  as  embracing  too  much.  The  ques- 
tion was  put  and  negatived  by  the  votes  of  Piatt,  Stearns 
and  Wilkin.  It  is  more  than  probable  that  the  cause  of 
Mr.  Radcliff's  opposition  to  Mr.  Hoffman,  was  that  he 
was  known  to  be  favorable  to  the  re-appointment  of  Mr. 
Clinton. 

The  removal  of  republicans  and  the  appointment  of 
federalists,  including  little  as  well  as  great  offices,  by  this 
council,  was  general  throughout  the  state. 

The  Bank  of  America  applied  to  be  relieved  from  pay- 
ment of  the  bonus,  the  payment  of  which  was  by  the  act 
of  incorporation,  made  a  condition  upon  which  their  char- 
ter was  granted.  They  alleged  that  it  was  impossible  to 
get  their  stock  taken  if  the  bank  was  to  be  charged  with 
such  heavy  payments,  and  they  also  asked  a  large  reduc- 
tion of  their  capital.  With  respect  to  the  reduction  of 
their  capital  the  legislature  granted  their  request,  and  they 
remitted  the  whole  of  the  bonus  with  the  exception  of 
one  hundred  thousand  dollars,  which  was  to  be  paid  to 
the  common  school  fund. 

A  strenuous  opposition  was  made  to  this  application  by 


1813.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  351 

the  former  opponents  of  the  bank;  and  it  was  charged  in 
private  circles  and  in  sonae  of  the  public  papers,  that  the 
bank  had  again  resorted  to  corrupt  means  to  accomplish 
its  object.  Whether  these  allegations  had  any  foundation 
in  truth,  we  have  at  this  day  no  means  of  knowing,  as  no 
depositions  were  taken. 

On  the  28th  of  January  of  this  year,  Robert  R.  Living- 
ston, late  chancellor,  died,  in  the  sixty-sixth  year  of  his 
age.  His  life  had  been  active  and  useful,  and  in  politics, 
he  long  occupied  a  large  space  in  the  public  mind.  I 
have  before  spoken  of  his  talents  and  address.  Whatever 
were  his  merits  as  a  judge,  or  a  politician,  and  they  were 
by  no  means  inconsiderable,  his  less  brilliant  efforts  in 
improving  the  breed  of  sheep  in  his  native  country,  and 
the  liberal  encouragement  which  by  his  wealth  and  influ- 
ence he  afforded  Mr.  Fulton  in  his  discoveries  of  the 
means  of  applying  steam  power  to  navigation,  will  do 
more  to  perpetuate  his  name  and  fame,  as  a  benefactor  to 
his  country,  than  his  address  and  skill  as  a  political  leader, 
or  his  splendid  display  of  eloquence  while  a  member  of 
that  grand  council  which  adopted  the  federal  constitution. 
By  his  death  the  Livingston  family  were  emphatically 
deprived  of  their  head;  and  since  that  event,  and  the  re- 
moval of  Edward  Livingston  from  the  state,  and  the 
appointment  and  acceptance  of  Brockholst  Livingston,  of 
the  office  of  associate  judge  of  the  United  States,  and  af- 
terwards his  death,  the  influence  of  that  family,  as  such, 
can  hardly  have  been  felt  in  the  political  operations  of 
parties  in  the  state. 

Charles  Z.  Piatt,  a  federalist,  was,  by  a  law  of  the  two 
houses,  created  treasurer,  in  lieu  of  Gen.  Thomas.  This 
act  was  passed  on  the  10th  day  of  February. 

Very  sharp  collisions  began  to  be  exhibited  between  the 
two  houses  of  the  legislature,  on  all  questions  of  legisla- 
tion which  related  to  the  prosecution  of  the  war  against 


352  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1813. 

Great  Britain.  The  state  presented  a  frontier  which  was 
eminently  exposed  to  the  attacks  of  the  enemy,  on  its 
southern,  northern  and  western  borders.  This  rendered 
the  duties  and  reponsibilities  of  the  governor  uncommonly 
laborious,  and  very  great;  and  he  was  by  no  means  want- 
ing in  his  efforts  to  discharge  those  duties  faithfully  and 
efficiently.  The  democratic  majority  in  the  senate,  mani- 
fested every  disposition  to  aid  him  by  all  constitutional 
means,  while  the  federal  majority  in  the  assembly  wished 
not  to  go  farther  in  support  of  a  war  which  many  of  them 
professed  to  believe  unjust,  and  all  of  them  believed  pre- 
maturely declared  and  badly  conducted,  than  was  demand- 
ed of  them  by  a  strict  construction  of  the  constitution  and 
laws  of  the  United  States. 

The  militia,  which  had  been  called  out  by  the  governor, 
the  last  autumn,  under  the  command  of  Gen.  Van  Rensse- 
laer, had  returned  dissatisfied  with  the  service,  and  with  the 
arrangements  made  by  the  government  for  their  manage- 
ment and  support.  They  were  also  disgusted  with  the  ill 
judged  and  unsuccessful  attack  on  the  British  soldiery  at 
Queenstown.  The  federalists  availed  themselves  of  this, 
and  all  other  unsuccessful  efforts  to  carry  on  the  war;  and 
their  movements  in  the  assembly  tended  rather  to  excite 
than  quiet  discontent. 

The  national  government,  soon  after  the  commencement 
of  the  war,  became  embarrassed  for  the  want  of  funds  to 
carry  it  on;  or  rather,  they  found  it  difficult,  if  not  impos- 
sible, to  collect  the  revenue  in  that  kind  of  money,  or 
negotiate  their  stock  for  that  sort  of  currency  which,  con- 
stitutionally speaking,  might  be  called  money.  The 
United  States  Bank  had  ceased  to  exist,  and  there  was, 
therefore,  no  national  paper  currency.  Great  Britain  then 
controlled,  as  now  she  continues  to  control,  the  money 
market  of  the  world;  and  she  being  our  enemy,  specie 
could  not  be  obtained  from  abroad,  nor,  in  fact,  could  for- 


1813.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  353 

eign  loans,  in  the  then  state  of  Europe,  have  beeneffectec?, 
had  the  effort  been  made  to  do  so.  The  national  govern 
ment,  therefore,  had  no  other  means  of  defraying  its  ex- 
penses than  by  borrowing  money  of  the  banks  chartered 
by  the  different  states,  on  the  credit  of  its  stock,  and  by 
issuing,  for  circulation,  its  own  notes  called  treasury  notes. 
But  the  banks  of  Boston,  and  indeed  the  whole  of  New- 
England,  were  mainly  under  the  control  of  federalists, 
and  they  refused  to  loan  a  single  dollar  to  the  government, 
or  to  do  any  act  which  might  give  credit  or  currency  to 
treasury  notes.  Of  course  the  national  treasury  was  .sup- 
plied by  loans  from  the  state  banks  south  and  west  of 
New-England,  and  the  disbursements  made  in  the  paper 
of  the  banks  last  mentioned.  It  was  evident  that  one  of 
two  results  must  be  produced  by  these  operations:  either 
all  the  specie  in  the  United  States  would  flow  into  the 
vaults  of  the  New-England  banks,  or  the  banks  of  the 
states,  other  than  those  of  New-England,  must  suspend 
specie  payments;  and  the  latter  course  was  adopted. 
The  consequence  was,  that  the  bank  paper  in  this,  and  in 
all  the  states  south  and  west  of  it,  forthwith  began  to 
depreciate.  The  paper  of  the  New-York  banks  was  the 
nearest  in  value  to  specie,  but  the  further  you  advanced 
south  or  west  from  New- York,  the  greater,  generally 
speaking,  was  the  depreciation. 

In  this  state  of  things,  a  resolution,  purporting  to  be 
joint,  passed  the  senate,  that  the  state  should  loan  to  the 
nation  five  hundred  thousand  dollars,  the  better  to  enable 
it  to  sustain  its  credit  and  make  its  necessary  disburse- 
ments. This  measure  was  advocated  with  great  power 
and  effect  by  Mr.  Van  Buren,  Gen.  Root  and  Gov.  Lewis; 
but  when  the  resolution  v/as  sent  to  the  assembly  it  was 
there  met  by  the  zealous,  and  finely  successful,  opposition 
of  Attorney  General  Van  Vechten,  Elisha  Williams,  an 
able  and  eloquent  lawyer  from  Columbia  county,  and  Mr. 

23 


354  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1813. 

Daniel  Cady  of  Montgomery .  In  that  house  the  republican 
party  were  defective  in  speaking  talent.  Mr.  Ross,  it  is 
true,  spoke  often,  but  his  arguments  failed  in  producing 
much  effect  when  put  in  competition  with  such  giants  as 
Elisha  Williams  and  his  compeers.  The  burden  of  resist- 
ing the  federal  majority  fell  principally  upon  John  W. 
Taylor,  of  Saratoga,  who,  though  not  a  brilliant  man,  was 
a  man  of  excellent  good  sense,  and  a  wary  and  cautious 
debater. 

On  the  fourth  day  of  February  a  legislative  caucus  was 
held  by  the  republican  members,  for  the  purpose  of  nomi- 
nating a  governor  and  lieutenant  governor.  According 
to  the  Albany  Register  only  forty-eight  members  attended 
on  this  occasion.  What  was  the  reason  that  no  greater 
number  was  present  does  not  appear.  It  may  be,  that 
some  members  declined  to  attend  in  consequence  of  the 
resolutions  of  the  Tammany  men  in  favor  of  a  state  con- 
vention. As  respected  the  candidate  for  governor  the 
meeting  were  unanimous,  but  there  was  a  diflference  of 
opinion  as  to  who  should  be  supported  for  lieutenant  gov- 
ernor. A  portion  of  the  members  still  adhered  to  Mr. 
Clinton,  and  were  for  re-nominating  him.  Judge  Spencer 
had,  for  some  time,  openly  denounced  him,  and  both  he, 
and  his  friend.  Col.  Jenkins,  wxre  exceedingly  active  in 
opposing  Mr.  C.'s  re-nomination. 

There  can  be  little  doubt,  that  the  confidential  and  secret, 
if  not  the  open  and  avowed,  influence  of  Gov.  Tompkins, 
was  exerted  against  Mr.  Clinton.  Whether  Mr.  Van 
Buren  took  an  active  part  either  way,  I  am  not  advised; 
and,  from  the  circumstance  of  his  not  being  assailed  in  the 
Albany  Register,  I  am  inclined  to  believe,  that,  at  any 
rate,  he  did  not  take  a  very  active  part  against  Mr.  Clin- 
ton. The  result  finally  was,  that  Mr.  Clinton  received 
but  sixteen  votes,  while  John  Taylor  received  thirty-two 
votes,  and  was  declared  duly  nominated.     Mr.  Van  Buren 


1813.]  OF    NEW-YOKK.  355 

drew  the  address  issued  by  the  republican  members  on 
this  occasion.  It  has  been  often  referred  to  by  his  friends, 
and  so  full  an  account  has  been  given  of  it  by  his  biogra- 
pher, (Holland,)  that  little  need  be  said  of  it  here.  I 
ought  however,  perhaps  to  add,  that  the  address  contained 
a  lucid  and  able  review  of  the  controversy  between  Ame- 
rica and  Great  Britain.  It  sustained,  with  strong  force  of 
argument,  the  course  which  had  been  pursued  by  the  na- 
tional government,  and  appealed,  with  great  pathos  and 
eloquence,  to  the  patriotism  of  the  people. 

Mr.  Van  Buren  has  been  blamed  for  his  support  of  Mr. 
Clinton,  as  inconsistent  with  the  zealous  support  he  yielded 
to  the  war,  and  to  the  re-election  of  Mr.  Tompkins;  and, 
as  is  usual  in  such  cases,  both  Clintonians  and  Madisoni- 
ans  have  cast  imputations  upon  him,  but,  in  my  judgment, 
wholly  without  cause. 

A  large  majority,  if  not  all  the  members  of  the  New- 
York  legislative  caucus,  which  nominated  Mr.  Clinton  for 
the  presidency,  were  ardent  in  support  of  the  war  mea- 
sures pursued  by  the  national  government,  and  many  of 
them  were  dissatisfied  with  the  sluggish  movements  and 
inertness  of  Mr.  Madison.  I  presume  one  reason  why 
they  preferred  Mr.  Clinton  to  Mr.  Madison,  was,  because 
they  believed  the  former  would  pursue  the  war  against 
Great  Britain  with  more  efficiency  and  more  energy  than 
the  latter,  but  they  had  not  the  most  distant  idea  of  sepa- 
rating themselves  from  the  great  republican  party  in  the 
state  or  nation.  At  any  rate,  I  know  this  to  have  been 
the  feelings  of  Mr. Clinton's  republican  friends  in  the  coun- 
try. I  can  have  no  doubt  that  Mr.  Van  Buren  entertained 
similar  impressions.  Besides,  he  was  not  a  member  of  the 
legislature  which  nominated  Mr.  Clinton.  He  only  saw 
in  the  result  of  that  caucus  an  expression  of  the  wishes  of 
the  republican  party  on  a  given  question.  Was  he  wrong 
in  attempting,  in  good  faith,  to  carry  those  wishes  into 


356  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1813. 

effect  1  Why,  then,  should  the  minority  of  the  republi- 
cans, who  thought  Mr.  Madison  ought  to  be  supported, 
condemn  Mr.  V.  B.  for  the  course  he  took  ?  Was  it  not 
his  duty,  and  had  he  not  the  same  right  to  follow  the 
honest  dictates  of  his  own  judgment  as  they  had,  especially 
where  he  had  evidence  that  his  own  views  were  in  accord- 
ance with  those  of  the  republican  party  in  the  state,  as 
declared  by  their  representatives? 

Mr.  Clinton,  and  his  immediate  friends,  had  still  less 
reason  to  complain  of  Mr.  Van  Buren  for  supporting 
Tompkins.  The  presidential  question  was  disposed  of. 
A  new  question  was  presented,  and  that  was,  whether,  in 
accordance  with  the  wishes  of  those  who  had  elected  him, 
he  would  support  the  republican  candidate  for  governor, 
or  whether,  contrary  to  the  principles  he  had  professed 
from  his  boyhood,  he  would  support  a  federal  candidate 
for  governor,  simply  because  Mr.  Clinton  did  not  choose 
to  support  the  candidate  of  the  republican  party  1  No 
man  possessing  common  honesty,  and  a  particle  of  self 
respect,  could,  without  feelings  of  resentment,  hear  such  a 
question  even  agitated  in  his  presence.  Conceding  that 
Mr.  Van  Buren  was,  in  principle,  attached  to  the  republi- 
can party,  his  conduct  was  not  only  politically,  but  mor- 
ally justifiable.  Indeed,  it  could  not  have  been  other 
than  it  was,  without  a  palpable  violation  of  principle  and 
of  duty. 

On  the  11th  of  February  the  federal  members  of  the 
iCgislature,  together  with  many  respectable  citizens,  held 
a  caucus  at  Albany,  of  which  Judge  Egbert  Bensonwas 
chairman,  and  Daniel  Parris  was  secretary;  at  which  Ste- 
phen Van  Rennselaer  was  nominated  for  governor,  and 
George  Huntington,  of  Oneida  county,  for  lieutenant  go- 
vernor. 

The  private  characters  of  these  gentlemen  were,  in  all 
respects,  perfectly  unexceptionable,  and  high  hopes  were 


1813.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  357 

entertained  by  the  federalists  of  success.*  A  circumstance 
which  added  considerably  to  these  hopes,  was,  that  an 
address  was  issued  signed  by  Philip  Van  Cortland,  Oba- 
diah  German,  and  thirty-nine  other  distinguished  friends  of 
Mr.  Clinton,  who  claimed  to  be  members  of  the  republican 
party.  The  address  attacked,  with  severity,  the  conduct 
of  the  general  administration;  reviewed  the  presidential 
contest;  and  protested  against  the  support  of  Tompkins 
and  Taylor,  alleging,  that  they  were  the  mere  partizans 
and  tools  of  the  cabinet  at  Washington.  It  was  extremely 
well  written,  and  from  its  style  and  matter,  was,  with 
great  probability,  ascribed  to  the  pen  of  Mr.  Clinton. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  remark,  that  the  general 
election  in  April  was  very  severely  contested;  but,  con- 
trary to  the  expectation  of  calculating  men  of  both  parties, 
and  to  the  bitter  mortification  of  the  federalists,  Tompkins 
and  Taylor  were  elected,  and  the  republican  senatorial 
ticket  succeeded  in  three,  out  of  the  four  districts. 

Jonathan  Dayton  was  elected  to  the  senate  from  the 
southern,  Lucas  ElmendorfF  and  Samuel  C.  Ver  Bryck 
from  the  middle,  James  Cochran  and  Samuel  Stewart  from 
the  eastern,  and  Farrand  Stranahan,  Henry  Bloom  and 
Pearley  Keyes  from  the  western  districts. 


*  In  consequence  of  the  last  census,  a  new  apportionment  of  representatives  in 
congress  was  made,  and,  therefore,  a  new  division  of  the  state  into  congressional 
districts  should  have  been  made  by  the  legislature,  at  their  winter  session  in  1812; 
but  the  prorogation  prevented  the  passage  of  such  an  act  before  the  April  election. 
For  this  reason  the  election  of  members  to  the  house  of  representatives  did  not 
talte  place  until  after  the  November  session,  when  the  proper  law  was  passed,  and 
an  election  ordered  in  December  following.  At  that  election,  out  of  thirty  repre- 
sentatives, the  federalists  elected  two-thirds.  The  result  of  this  appeal  to  the 
people,  as  was  alleged,  on  the  war  question,  afforded  great  triumph  to  the  oppo- 
nents of  Mr.  Madison's  administration,  and  increased  the  already  sanguine  hopes 
of  the  federalists,  of  success  at  the  general  state  election  inApril. 

The  venerable  Egbert  Benson  was  chosen  from  the  second  district,  which  inclu- 
ded the  city  of  New- York.  He  was  far  advanced  in  life,  but  the  residue  of  the 
federal  members  were  most  of  them  comparatively  young  men.  Hence  they  were 
called  "Judge  Bemon't  hoys,"  being  nineteen  in  number.  The  appellation  was 
the  more  ludicrous  because  the  judge  was  a  bachelor. 


358  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1813. 

The  result  of  the  vote  was  as  follows: — 

Southern  District,  Rep.  Maj 593 

Middle  "  "        "  1452 

Western         "  "        " 3274 

5319 
Eastern  District,  Fed.  Maj 1713 

Rep.  Maj.  in  the  State, 3606 

But,  notwithstanding  this  success  in  the  senatorial  dis- 
tricts, and  in  the  election  of  governor,  the  federalists 
obtained  a  majority  in  the  assembly,  in  consequence  of 
the  election  of  federal  members,  by  a  small  majority,  from 
the  city  of  New-York. 

The  very  decided  part  taken  by  Mr.  Southwick,  in  the 
Albany  Register,  against  the  election  of  Gov.  Tompkins, 
and  indeed  against  the  republican  party  in  the  state  and 
nation,  induced  the  establishment,  during  the  summer  of 
1813,  of  the  Albany  Argus,  under  the  charge  of  Jesse 
Buel,  Esq.,  who  had  formerly  printed  the  Plebian,  in  the 
county  of  Ulster.  Mr.  Buel,  though  not  a  brilliant,  was 
a  very  discreet  and  judicious  man,  and  the  Albany  Argus 
soon  became  the  organ  of  the  republican  party  at  the  seat 
of  government. 

Upon  the  pressing  recommendation  of  Judge  Spencer 
and  Gov.  Tompkins,  and  other  friends  to  the  national 
administration.  Gen.  John  Armstrong  had,  in  the  autumn 
of  1812,  been  appointed  secretary  of  the  department  of 
war,  and  he  now  began  to  be  talked  of  as  the  most  suitable 
man  to  succeed  Mr.  Madison  in  the  presidency.  Judge 
Spencer,  who  had  always  been,  and  to  this  day  continues 
to  be,  his  devoted  friend  and  admirer,  was  loud  in  his 
praise,  and  openly  spoke  of  him  as  a  candidate. 

In  the  autumn  of  this  year  Mr.  Curtinius  was  removed 
from  the  office  of  marshal  of  New- York,  and  Gen.  Smith, 


1813.]  OF    NEW-YOEK.  359 

United  States  senator,  appointed  in  his  place.  Mr. 
Schenck  was  also  removed  from  the  office  of  surveyor  of 
the  port  of  New-York,  and  Mr.  Haff  was  appointed  his 
successor.  These  removals  were  made  upon  the  pressing 
recommendation  of  Judge  Spencer,  as  was  alleged,  for 
no  other  cause  than  that  the  incumbents  were  the  political 
and  personal  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton. 


360  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1813. 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1813,  TO  MAY  1,  1814. 

Governor  Tompkins  had  by  this  time  obtained  a  strcng 
hold  on  the  feelings  of  the  citizens  of  this  state.  He  had 
avoided  so  far  as  he  could,  a  direct  collision  with  the 
friends  of  Mr.  Clinton.  Although  Clinton  being  a  man 
of  that  temperament  and  character  of  mind,  that  whenever 
he  discovered  that  a  person  professing  to  be  his  political 
friend,  declined  entering  into  all  his  views,  forthwith  broke 
off  all  political  intercourse  with  him;  (which  perhaps  was 
a  fault,)  and  therefore,  by  this  time,  was  open  in  his  de- 
nunciations of  Gov.  Tompkins,  still  the  governor  contrived 
to  retain  the  friendship  of  many  Clintonians.  This  re- 
sult was  the  more  easily  produced,  because  Judge  Spencer, 
always  open  in  his  hostility,  always  ardent  and  sometimes 
bitter  in  his  political  controversies,  was  waging  a  most 
furious  war  against  Mr.  Clinton,  and  all  his  supporters; 
and  in  consequence  thereof,  was  much  more  the  subject 
of  attack  in  the  Clintonian  newspapers  and  public  and 
street  conversation,  than  the  governor.  Tompkins  was  by 
no  means  displeased  with  this  state  of  things.  He  had 
already  cast  an  eye  upon  the  presidency,  and  the  late  de- 
feat of  Mr.  Clinton,  had  in  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Tomp- 
kins, rendered  him  Hors  du  combat.  Him,  therefore,  he 
could  no  longer  regard  as  a  rival,  but  Gen.  Armstrong, 
if  the  next  president  was  to  be  taken  from  New-York,  was 
a  formidable  one.  The  governor  knew  that  the  strength 
of  Armstrong  in  this  state  depended  greatly  on  the  in- 
fluence of  Judge  Spencer,  with  the  republican  party  here. 
It  was  then  obviously  the  interest  of  Gov.  Tompkins  to 
weaken  as  far  as  he  could  the   influence  of  Spencer.     It 


1813.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  361 

is,  therefore,  highly  probable  that  he  viewed  the  increase 
of  personal  unkind  feeling  towards  Judge  Spencer  with 
more  complacence  than  regret. 

Not  many  days  ago,  in  a  conversation  with  an  old  and 
experienced  politician,  an  exceedingly  judicious  man  and 
one  who  has  looked  profoundly  into  the  human  heart, 
who  for  more  than  twenty  ;)ears  was  a  member  of  the 
United  States  house  of  representatives,  and  was  repeated- 
ly elected  speaker  of  that  body,  (John  W.  Taylor,)  in 
relation  to  Gov.  Tompkins,  he  remarked  that  he  never 
knew  a  man  who  had  fixed  his  hopes  upon  the  presidency 
who  would  not  sacrifice  all  personal  considerations,  and 
all  pre-existing  friendships  to  attain  his  object. 

Another  cause  of  the  popularity  of  Gov.  Tompkins 
was,  that  there  was  no  circumstance  which  could  be 
brought  to  the  view  of  the  people  by  which  their 
jealousy  of  him  could  be  excited.  He  was  not  a  rich 
man,  nor  had  he  any  powerful  connexions.  He  was  the 
son  of  a  practical  farmer  of  Westchester  county,  and  his 
favorite  title  with  the  people  was  the  "  Farmer's  Boy." 
To  other  advantages  he  added  a  most  fascinating  address. 
Professor  Renwick,  in  his  life  of  Clinton,  (page  66,) 
says; — "  Tompkins  with  no  remarkable  native  powers  of 
mind,  and  but  little  acquirement  even,  as  a  lawyer,  pos- 
sessed in  a  most  eminent  degree,  the  art  of  ingratiating 
himself  with  the  people.  He  had  the  faculty,  which  is 
invaluable  to  him  who  seeks  for  popular  honors,  of  never 
forgetting  the  name  or  face  of  any  person  Avith  whom  he 
once  conversed;  of  becoming  acquainted  and  appearing 
to  take  interest  in  the  concerns  of  their  families;,  and  of 
securing,  by  his  affability  and  amiable  address,  the  good 
opinion  of  the  female  sex,  who,  although  possessed  of  no 
vote,  often  exercise  a  powerful  indirect  influence." 

I  may  be  allowed  to  say,  although  I  had  little  personal 
acquaintance  with  Gov.  Tompkins,  that  in  my  judgment, 


362  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1813. 

the  professor  underrates  his  talents.  I  think,  the  skill  and 
tact  with  which  he  moulded  the  minds  of  men  to  his  own 
purposes,  and  the  prudence  with  which  he  for  a  long  time 
conducted  himself  at  the  head  of  a  state  containing  such 
strangepolitical  materials  as  did  the  state  of  New-York,  du- 
ring that  period,  are  of  themselves,  evidence  of  much  more 
than  ordinary  mental  powers;  and  although  he  was  taken 
from  the  bar  and  the  bench  when  he  was  too  young  to  have 
become  a  profound  and  learned  lawyer,  yet  I  have  never 
heard  that  the  opinions  which  he  delivered  while  he  was  a 
judge  of  the  supreme  court  were  considered  unworthy  of 
the  reputation  for  learning  and  talents  which  a  judge  of  that 
high  tribunal  ought  to  possess.  Of  the  evidence  of  talent 
which  his  communications  to  the  legislature  afford,  while 
he  was  governor,  I  have  heretofore  spoken.  What  Mr. 
Renwick  says  of  him  in  respect  to  his  peculiar  faculty  of 
never  forgetting  the  name  or  face  of  a  person  with  whom 
he  had  ever  conversed,  is  literally  true;  and  I  could  relate 
several  instances  within  my  own  knowledge,  some  of  which 
are  almost  unaccountable  in  confirmation  of  its  verity. 
This  faculty,  although  rare,  is  of  great  use  to  the  man  who 
holds  an  eminent  station  in  a  popular  government.  It  is 
said  that  Scylla,  the  Dictator,  personally  knew  every  citi- 
zen of  Rome,  and  that  he  could  call  them  all  by  name. 
This  extraordinary  quality  of  mind  may  have  been  of  as 
much  use  to  him  in  contested  elections  as  was  the  splen- 
dor of  his  military  achievements  in  Asia. 

The  extraordinary  and  almost  miraculous  success  of 
Gov.  Tompkins  at  the  election  of  1813,  after  the  strong 
demonstrations  of  a  federal  majority  in  the  congressional 
elections  in  December  preceding,  and  in  the  face  of  the 
opposition  of  Mr.  Clinton  and  some  of  his  most  power- 
ful friends,  while  it  afforded  evidence  of  his  popularity 
added  to  it.  In  war  success  is  said  to  sanctify  crimes,  in 
politics  it  converts  errors  into  catholic  doctrines. 


1814.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  363 

There  was  anotner  circumstance  which  added  greatly  to 
the  popularity  and  standing  of  Tompkins.  The  whole 
five  New-England  states  had  become  federal,  and  New- 
Jersey,  if  not  already,  seemed  hastening  to  become  so.  The 
federalism  of  the  eastern  states  was  of  the  most  ultra  kind. 
It  was  apprehended  that  they  were  determined  either  to 
change  the  administration,  or  to  secede  from  the  union, 
and  form  a  separate  peace  with  Great  Britain.  This, 
however,  they  would  hardly  have  the  temerity  to  do,  if 
New-York  continued  to  support  the  national  administra- 
tion. But  if  New-York  joined  them,  or  even  became 
opposed  to  the  further  prosecution  of  the  war,  the  finan- 
cial affairs  of  the  nation  would  become  so  straightened  and 
embarrassed,  as  would  have  compelled  either  a  change  of 
the  administration,  or  the  submission  of  the  United  States 
to  a  disgraceful  peace;  and,  in  the  event  last  referred  to, 
the  administration  would,  of  course,  be  prostrated.  No 
wonder  then,  that  the  eyes  of  republicans  throughout  the 
nation  should  have  been  fixed  with  deep  and  painful  anxi- 
ety on  the  election  of  governor  in  New- York.  The  suc- 
cess of  the  democratic  party  was  hailed  by  the  democrats 
abroad,  and  especially  by  Mr.  Madison  and  his  cabinet, 
with  unspeakable  joy  and  exultation.  That  success  was 
imputed,  and  perhaps  justly  imputed,  to  the  personal 
popularity  of  Tompkins,  and  his  universal  popularity 
abroad  increased  his  popular  standing  at  home. 

The  legislature  convened  on  the  25th  January.  James 
Emott,  a  respectable  lawyer  from  Dutchess  county,  was 
the  federal  candidate  for  speaker,  and  William  Ross  was 
the  candidate  of  the  republican  party.  Mr.  Emott  received 
fifty-eight  votes,  and  Mr.  Ross  forty-eight,  shewing  a 
federal  majority  often  m  the  assembly. 

The  governor's  speech  was  chiefly  confined  to  a  detail 
of  the  events  of  the  war.  In  the  course  of  his  speech,  he 
alluded  to  the  law  of  congress  laying  a  direct  tax,  the 


364  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1814. 

portion  of  which  to  be  raised  in  the  state  of  New- York, 
was  four  hundred  and  thirty  thousand  one  hundred  and 
forty-one  dollars  and  sixty-two  cents.  This  act  provided, 
that  if  any  state  preferred  a  voluntary  assumption  and 
payment  of  its  portion,  and  paid  the  same  into  the  national 
treasury  by  the  20th  of  February,  a  deduction  of  fifteen 
per  cent  should  be  made,  and  if  thus  assumed  and  paid  by 
the  1st  of  May  then  a  deduction  of  ten  per  cent  should  be 
made.  The  Bank  of  America,  and  some  other  banks, 
were  pledged  to  loan  the  state,  when  called  on  for  that 
purpose,  moneys  to  a  much  larger  amount  than  the  quota 
of  the  state  of  the  direct  tax;  and  the  governor  recom- 
mended that  the  state  should  assume  the  payment  of  its 
portion  of  the  tax,  and  pay  the  same  by  a  loan  from  those 
banks,  to  be  re-imbursed  by  a  tax,  to  be  levied  and  col- 
lected in  the  ordinary  way,  by  the  state.  The  speech 
was  referred  to  Messrs.  D.  B.  Ogden,  Bleecker  and  Ross. 
Late  in  the  preceding  autumn  the  British  had  made  an 
incursion  on  the  Niagara  frontier,  and  had  burnt  a  consid- 
erable part  of  the  village  of  Buffalo.  On  the  first  day  of 
the  session,  and  as  soon  as  the  house  was  organized,  on 
the  motion  of  Mr.  Jacob  R.  Van  Rensselaer,  a  federal 
member,  the  assembly  passed  a  resolution,  purporting  to 
be  joint,  for  loaning  to  the  sufferers,  in  consequence  of 
this  attack,  fifty  thousand  dollars.  Mr.  Ross  made  an 
ineffectual  effort  to  postpone  the  consideration  of  the  reso- 
lution. The  motion  for  a  postponement  was  negatived 
by  a  party  vote.  As  the  federalists  were  constantly  being 
charged  with  opposition  to  the  war,  &c.,  their  unusual 
early  movement  in  this  matter  must  have  been  with  a  view 
of  affording  evidence  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  frontier,  of 
their  sympathy  for  those  who  were  suffering  in  conse- 
quence of  the  depredations  of  the  enemy,  and  with  the 
further  intent  of  being  before  hand  with  the  senate  in 
support  of  a  measure  which,  it  was  presumed,  would  be 


1814.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  365 

popular,  especially  in  the  western  district.  In  the  resolu- 
tion, the  commissioners  for  distributing  the  money  were 
named.  They,  of  course,  were  federalists.  When  the 
proposition  was  acted  on  in  the  senate,  it  was  amended  by 
striking  out  the  names  of  the  federal  commissioners,  and 
inserting,  in  their  place,  the  names  of  republicans.  With 
this  amendment  the  assembly  non-concurred.  A  collision 
in  this  way  occurred  between  the  two  houses,  and  for  some 
time  it  seemed  doubtful  whether  the  sufferers  would  not 
be  deprived  of  the  bounty  of  the  state,  merely  because  the 
two  parties  could  not  agree  on  the  appointment  of  agents 
to  distribute  it.  Such  a  contest  was  discreditable  to  both 
parties. 

The  assembly  also,  on  the  first  day  of  their  meeting, 
elected  a  council  of  appointment.  Unfortunately  for  the 
federalists  there  were  no  federalists  in  the  senate  from 
both  the  middle  and  western  districts,  the  term  of  service 
of  Messrs.  Plattj  Hall  and  Phelps,  having  expired;  and 
the  federalists  finally  selected  Mr.  Henry  A.  Townsend, 
of  Steuben  county,  as  their  councillor. 

Mr.  Townsend  was  elected,  in  1810,  as  a  republican, 
and  it  does  not  appear  that  he  had,  at  any  time,  professed 
a  change  of  principles;  but  he  was  a  friend  of  Mr.  Clin- 
ton, and  his  support  of  that  gentleman,  together  with  his 
vote  for  incorporating  the  Bank  of  America,  had  brought 
him  in  collision  with  Judge  Spencer  and  other  zealous 
politicians.  These  were,  probably,  the  circumstances 
which  led  to  his  selection. 

The  result  of  the  vote,  for  members  of  the  council,  was 
as  follows: — Elbert  H.  Jones,  fifty-six;  Morgan  Lewis, 
fifty-six;  Samuel  Stewart,  fifty-six;  Henry  A.  Townsend, 
fifty-seven;  Nathan  Sanford,  forty-nine;  Lucas  ElmendorfF, 
forty-eight;  Henry  Yates,  jun.,  forty-eight;  and  Farrand 
Stranahan,  forty-eight. 

Before  the  expiration  of  the  term  of  service  of  the 


366  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1814. 

council  chosen  In  1813,  the  office  of  chancellor  became 
vacant,  by  Mr.  Lansing's  being  ineligible  in  consequence 
of  his  age.  Chief  Justice  Kent  was  therefore  appointed 
chancellor,  and  Smith  Thompson  succeeded  him  as  chief 
justice. 

On  the  3d  February,  Elisha  Jenkins  was  removed  from 
the  office  of  secretary  of  state,  and  Jacob  Rutsen  Van 
Rensselaer,  the  late  speaker,  appointed  in  his  place. 
What  produced  this  long  delay  in  displacing  Mr.  Jenkins 
I  cannot  state,  unless  it  was  that  the  office  was  intended 
for  Mr.  Van  Rensselaer,  and  that  the  discharge  of  its  du- 
ties was  deemed  incompatible  with  a  satisfactory  per- 
formance of  the  labors  which  are  necessarily  cast  upon 
the  speaker. 

The  only  question  of  importance,  which  the  council  of 
1814  were  called  on  to  decide,  was  that  of  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  judge  of  the  supreme  court,  which  was  rendered 
necessary  to  supply  the  vacancy  produced  by  the  elevation 
of  Chief  Justice  Kent  to  the  office  of  chancellor,  the 
greater  part  of  the  offices  in  the  state  being  held  by  per- 
sons who  belonged  to  the  party  which  held  the  majority  in 
the  assembly. 

Gen.  Piatt  was  the  candidate  most  favored  by  a  large 
majority  of  the  federalists.  The  object  of  Mr.  Lewis, 
who  now  claimed  to  be  most  purely  and  exclusively  a 
republican,  seems  to  have  been  to  prevent  Mr.  Piatt's 
appointment.  Mr.  Townsend  w^as  considered,  and  per- 
haps correctly  so,  as  the  representative  of  Mr.  Clinton, 
and  as  speaking  his  wishes  in  the  council.  At  any  rate, 
the  public  held  Mr.  Clinton  responsible  for  every  act  done 
by  Mr.  Townsend.  Gov.  Tompkins  acted  in  concert  and 
harmony  with  Mr.  Lewis:  a  singular  alteration  since  1807, 
when  Gen.  Piatt  was  supporting  Mr.  Lewis  against  Mr. 
Tompkins.  Mr.  Clinton  was  accused  of  bargaining  with 
the  federalists  to  procure  Gen.  Piatt  to  be  appointed  a 


1S14.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  367 

judge  of  the  supreme  court;  in  consideration  of  which,  it 
was  said,  the  federalists  had  stipulated  that  Mr.  Clinton 
should  be  continued  in  the  mayoralty  of  New- York. 
With  a  view  to  strengthen  this  suspicion,  and  with  the 
further  view  to  detach  from  Mr.  Clinton  the  greatest  pos- 
sible number  of  his  supporters,  and  possibly  with  some 
hope  that  the  appointment  of  Mr.  Piatt  might  be  prevent- 
ed, Mr.  Lewis  nominated  Richard  Riker,  of  New-York, 
for  a  judge  of  the  supreme  court.  To  show  the  embar- 
rassment this  nomination  must  have  occasioned  to  Mr. 
Townsend,  as  the  friend  of  Mr.  Clinton,  it  is  only  neces- 
sary to  recollect  that  Mr,  Riker  was  the  second  of  Mr. 
Clinton  in  the  Swartwout  duelj  that  he  had  ever  since 
continued  to  be  his  personal  and  political  friend,  in  all  the 
Avars  with  the  Burrites,  Lewisites  and  Tammany  men  that 
subsequently  occurred  in  the  city  of  New-York;  and  that, 
as  we  have  seen,  he  was  at  the  head  of  the  committee  to 
promote  the  election  of  Mr.  Clinton  to  the  presidency. 
But,  if  it  would  seem  inconsistent  for  Mr.  Townsend,  as 
the  friend  of  Mr.  Clinton,  to  vote  against  the  appointment 
of  Riker,  it  was  equally  inconsistent  and  unnatural  for 
Mr.  Lewis  to  nominate  him;  for  Riker  had  been  steadily 
and  violently  opposed  to  Lewis,  and  Lewis  to  him,  from 
the  year  1805,  to  the  year  1814;  and  yet  Lewis  did  nomi- 
nate Riker,  and  Townsend  did  vote  against  that  nomina- 
tion. Misery,  it  is  said,  makes  a  man  acquainted  with 
strange  bed  fellows,  and  so  does  party  politics.  As  re- 
spects the  fitness  of  Riker  for  the  office  of  judge,  when 
compared  to  Piatt,  I  imagine  all  will  agree  that  Piatt  was 
the  most  suitable  and  fit  man.  Mr.  Piatt  was  appointed, 
and  Mr.  Riker,  ever  after,  ceased  to  be  a  friend  to  Mr. 
Clinton. 

Party  heat  never  was  higher,  in  the  legislature,  than 
during  this  session.  The  strong  republican  majority  in 
the  senate,  and  the  zeal  of  that  majority  to  aid  in  the  vigo- 


368  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1814. 

rous  prosecution  of  the  war,  induced  that  body  to  propose 
a  variety  of  measures,  in  accordance  with  their  views, 
which,  when  presented  to  the  assembly,  were  generally 
resisted,  and  by  the  majority  rejected.  The  republican 
party  in  the  assembly,  though  still  in  the  minority,  had 
received  a  great  accession  of  moral  power  by  the  last  elec- 
tion. John  Savage,  late  chief  justice,  from  Washington 
county,  Samuel  Young,  the  late  canal  commissioner,  from 
Saratoga  county,  Aaron  Hackley  from  Herkimer  county, 
and  William  C.  Bouck,  late  a  canal  commissioner,  from 
Schoharie  county,  together  with  several  others,  were  all 
new  members,  all  young  men  of  great  promise,  and  all 
possessed  of  talents  of  a  high  order. 

The  federalists,  as  a  party,  from  the  time  of  John  Adams, 
had  always  professed  themselves  the  friends  of  a  navy, 
and  they  complained  of  Mr.  Jefferson  for  his  neglect  in 
not  encourageing,  supporting  and  adding  to  that  arm  of 
the  national  defence.  Hence,  when  a  naval  victory  was 
achieved  over  the  British,  or  a  naval  defeat  on  our  side 
occurred,  they,  in  one  case,  were  most  forward  to  express 
their  exultation,  and,  in  the  other,  their  regret,  while  they 
manifested  very  little  sensibility  at  any  disaster  to  the 
American  forces  engaged  in  the  land  service. 

As  a  specimen  of  the  party  action  of  that  day,  I  think 
proper  to  state  the  proceedings  which  took  place  in  the 
assembly,  in  relation  to  several  naval  actions  which  had 
then  lately  taken  place. 

A  federal  member  from  the  city  of  New-York,  Mr. 
Charles  King,  on  the  28th  of  January,  offered  the  follow- 
ing resolutions: — 

"  Resolvedj  That  although  we  cannot  approve  of  the 
disastrous  and  destructive  war  in  which  we  are  engaged, 
the  house  of  assembly  of  the  people  of  the  state  of  New- 
York  feel  great  satisfaction  in  expressing  their  admiration 
of  the  conduct  of  Com.  Perry,  and  his  gallant  associates, 


1814.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  369 

m  their  action  with  the  British  squadron  upon  Lake  Erie, 
on  the  11th  Sept.  last,  and  the  high  sense  they  entertain 
of  the  gallantry  of  Lieut.  Burroughs,  of  the  United  States 
brig  Enterprize,  who  died  after  conquering  a  vessel  of 
equal  force  belonging  to  the  enemy. 

"  That  they  deeply  lament  the  fall  of  captains  Lawrence 
and  Allen,  by  which  their  country  is  deprived  of  the  ser- 
vice of  two  officers  who  had  already  so  highly  entitled 
themselves  to  its  admiration  and  gratitude — 

"  That,  in  the  opinion  of  this  house,  the  conduct  of  our 
naval  commanders  and  seamen  during  this  ruinous  war, 
ought  to  satisfy  every  reflecting  mind  that  our  commercial 
rights  are  to  be  defended  and  maintained  by  a  navy,  and 
not  by  embargoes  and  commercial  restrictions." 

Mr.  Savage,  with  a  view  of  rendering  the  resolutions 
acceptable  to  the  whole  house,  offered  a  substitute  for  the 
first  resolution,  in  which  the  words  "  although  we  cannot 
approve  of  the  disastrous  and  destructive  war  in  which  we 
are  engaged^''  were  omitted;  but  the  substitute  was  reject- 
ed by  a  party  vote.  The  second  resolution  was  passed 
by  an  unanimous  vote.  When  the  third  resolution  was 
under  consideration,  Mr.  Young  moved  to  strike  out  the 
"Word  "  ruinous,"  and  that  part  of  it  which  condemned  the 
embargo  and  restrictive  measures.  This  amendment  was 
also  rejected  by  the  same  vote,  and  the  resolutions,  as 
offered  by  Mr.  King,  were  adopted. 

The  answer  of  the  senate  to  the  governor's  speech  was 
drawn  by  Mr.  Van  Buren,  and  is  an  admirable  production. 
The  senators  assured  the  governor  of  their  readiness  to 
co-operate  with  him  in  all  proper  measures  to  defend  the 
country,  and  to  preserve  its  honor  and  independence. 
They  conclude  their  address  with  the  expression  of  the 
following  just  and  patriotic  sentiment: — 

"  That  on  questions  of  general  policy,  or  the  fitness  of 
individuals  for  particular  stations,  we  shall  ever  be  ex- 

24 


370  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1814. 

empted  from  differences  of  opinion,  is  not  to  be  expected. 
Divisions  like  those  are  inseparable  from  the  blessings  of 
our  free  constitution;  and  although  sometimes  carried  to 
an  excess  which  all  good  men  must  deplore,  they  are,  not- 
withstanding, generally  productive  of  much  national  good. 
But  to  suppose  that  a  people  jealous  of  their  rights,  and 
proud  of  their  national  character,  would,  on  a  question  of 
resisting  the  aggressions  of  an  open  enemy — aggressions 
which  have  polluted  our  soil,  and  which  threaten  the  sub- 
version of  those  inestimable  political  institutions  which 
have  been  consecrated  to  freedom  by  the  blood  and  suffer- 
ings of  their  fathers — that  on  a  question  of  such  vital 
interest,  so  well  calculated  to  excite  all  the  patriotism,  to 
arouse  all  the  spirit,  and  to  call  into  action  all  the  ener- 
gies of  the  nation,  they  would  waste  their  strength  in  use- 
less collisions  with  each  other,  would  be  a  reflection  upon 
their  discernment  and  their  character  which  they  can  never 
merit." 

The  answer  of  the  assembly  was  indecorously  severe 
and  bitter  against  the  governor,  and  against  the  war.  It, 
nevertheless,  passed  in  that  body  by  a  vote  of  fifty-five  to 
forty-one. 

The  senate  passed  a  bill,  in  pursuance  of  the  recommen- 
dation of  the  governor,  for  the  assumption  by  the  state  of 
its  quota  of  the  direct  tax;  but  the  bill  was,  on  motion  of 
Mr.  Hyde,  rejected  in  the  assembly,  fifty-five  members 
voting  in  the  affirmative,  on  that  motion.  The  bill,  when 
it  was  received  from  the  senate,  was  referred  to  a  select 
committee,  who  in  their  report,  stated  sundry  objections 
to  its  passage,  and  concluded  by  saying,  "Judging  of  the 
future  by  the  past,  your  committee  beg  leave  to  express 
their  firm  conviction,  that  instead  of  wasting  the  resources 
of  the  state  by  granting  them  to  the  general  government, 
it  is  the  solemn  and  imperious  duty  of  the  legislature,  to 


1814.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  371 

seek  the  reimbursement  of  the  expenses  already  incurred 
by  this  state  on  account  of  the  war." 

On  the  31st  January,  Mr.  Van  Buren  brought  into  the 
senate  a  bill  for  the  repeal  of  the  restraining  law,  and,  on 
the  same  day,  Mr.  John  B.  Coles,  a  federal  member, 
brought  a  like  bill  into  the  assembly,  showing  on  this,  as 
on  all  other  occasions,  that  the  questions  relating  to  banks 
and  banking  privileges,  were  not  of  a  political  nature,  ex- 
cept when  artificially  made  so  by  those  interested  in  banks; 
and  that  they  are  merely  questions  between  the  holders  of 
exclusive  franchises,  and  the  community.  The  bill  failed 
of  becoming  a  law. 

It  will  readily  be  imagined  that,  during  this  session, 
frequent  collisions  occurred  between  the  two  houses. 
The  views  of  the  federalists  and  republicans,  on  all  ques- 
tions of  legislation  which  related  to  the  prosecution  of  the 
war,  (and  there  were  several  such,)  were  so  adverse,  that 
hardly  any  measures  were  proposed  by  the  one  which 
were  not  resisted,  or  attempted  to  be  modified,  by  the 
other.  This  led  to  frequent  conference^  In  these  con- 
ferences the  views  of  the  assembly  were  generally  sus- 
tained by  the  splendid  talents  of  David  B.  Ogden,  Samuel 
Jones,  Jun.,  Charles  King,  and  Jacob  Rutsen  Van  Rensse- 
laer, while  the  management  of  conferences,  on  the  part  of 
the  senate,  was  commonly  entrusted  to  Martin  Vc^n  Buren, 
Erastus  Root  and  Nalhan  Sanford.  Mr.  Sanford  seldom 
took  much  part  in  the  discussion;  the  battle,  on  the  part 
of  the  senate,  was  commonly  fought  by  Gen.  Root  and 
Mr.  Van  Buren. 

The  former  had  been  long  trained  in  the  business  of 
legislation.  Though  a  little  uncouth  in  his  manner,  and 
rough,  and,  I  fear,  sometimes  rude  in  his  expressions,  his 
wit  was  keen,  and  his  sarcasms  severe  and  biting.  He 
seized  with  great  force  and  effect  upon  the  prominent 
points,  and  especially  those  points  most  likely  to  make  an 


372  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1814. 

impression  on  the  popular  ear,  and  pressed  them  with  a 
power  almost  irresistible.  His  illustrations  were  exceed- 
ingly clear  and  well  chosen,  and  his  attacks  upon  his  op- 
ponents were  severe  almost  to  ferocity.  From  the  year 
1798,  down  to  that  period,  he  had  been  almost  continually 
a  member  either  of  the  state  or  national  legislature^  and 
possessing,  as  he  did,  a  most  retentive  memory,  he  was 
perfectly  at  home  on  all  matters  relating  to  the  history  of 
the  action  of  both  governments,  and  the  operations  of  both 
the  great  political  parties.  He  had  much  parliamentary 
tact,  and  although,  as  I  have  remarked,  he  was  harsh 
in  his  manner,  and  reckless  in  his  expressions,  he  was  a 
man  of  correct  literary  taste,  and,  though  severe  to  his  op- 
ponentsof  highly  cultivated  intellect.  "  He  was  a  scholar, 
and  a  good  and  ripe  one."  Mr.  Van  Buren,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  clear  and  logical  in  his  reasoning,  though 
sometimes  sophistical,  and  his  manner  and  matter  was  deco- 
rous towards  his  opponents.  No  man  knew  better  than 
he,  how  to  avail  himself  most  effectually  of  any  defect  in 
the  arguments  of  his  opponents.  His  biographer,  Mr. 
Holland,  {Van  Burenh  Life.  p.  103,)  when  speaking  of 
the  part  which  Mr.  Van  Buren  took  in  these  discussions, 
says,  "  In  these  conferences  the  measures  in  dispute  were 
publicly  discussed,  and  the  discussion  embraced  the  gene- 
ral policy  of  the  administration  and  the  expediency  of  the 
war.  The  exciting  nature  of  the  questions  thus  debated, 
the  solemnity  of  the  occasion,  the  discussions  being  con- 
ducted in  the  presence  of  the  two  houses,  and  the  brilliant 
talents  of  the  parties  to  the  controversy,  drew  vast  audi- 
ences, and  presented  a  field  for  the  display  of  eloquence, 
unsurpassed,  in  dignity  and  interest,  by  the  assemblies  of 
ancient  Greece.  Mr.  Van  Buren  was  always  the  leading 
speaker  on  the  part  of  the  senate;  and  by  the  vigor  of  his 
logic,  his  acuteness  and  dexterity  in  debate,  and  the  patri- 
otic spirit  of  his  sentiments,  commanded  great  applause." 


1814.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  373 

Although  this  biography  was  written,  it  is  presumed,  with 
a  view  to  produce  effect  at  a  presidential  election,  when 
Mr.  Van  Buren  was  a  candidate,  I  consider  the  author's 
statement,  in  the  above  extract,  as  literally  correctj  and, 
therefore,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  copy  it  into  a  work,  which, 
whatever  may  be  its  other  defects,  I  hope,  will  not  smack 
of  political  or  personal  partiality. 

During  this  session  a  law  was  passed  granting  to  Union 
College  the  very  liberal  sum  of  two  hundred  thousand 
dollars,  in  addition  to  former  grants.  This  sum  was  to  be 
raised  by  lotteries.  It  was  urged  that  this  mode  of  raising 
money  was  immoral,  but  probably  those  whose  conscien- 
ces were  the  most  tender  on  that  subject  would  have  voted 
against  a  grant,  or  at  any  rate,  so  large  a  grant  of  money 
to  Union  College,  if  the  money  had  been  raised  by  any 
other  means.  At  that  time,  lotteries  were  tolerated,  and 
would  have  been  granted,  if  not  for  that,  for  some  other 
purposes.  The  same  bill  also  provided  for  small  dona- 
tions to  Columbia  College,  to  Hamilton  College,  to  an 
African  Church,  to  the  Historical  Society,  to  the  College 
of  Physicians  and  Surgeons  of  the  western  district,  and  to 
the  Medical  College  of  New-York.  The  donations  to  so 
many  institutions,  in  various  parts  of  the  state,  probably 
was  the  means  of  forming  an  interest  which  secured  the 
passage  of  the  bill.  The  Rev.  Dr.  Nott,  the  president  of 
Union  College,  was,  I  have  no  doubt,  the  individual  who 
devised  this  grand  scheme  for  the  liberal  and  permanent 
endowment  of  the  institution  over  which  he  presided. 
Certainly  it  is  owing  to  his  indefatigable  exertions,  and 
matchless  skill  and  address,  that  a  majority  in  favor  of  the 
bill  was  obtained  in  both  houses.  His  ingenuity  in  ex- 
plaining away  and  warding  off  objections;  his  skill  in 
combining  different  and  apparently  conflicting  interests; 
and,  abovt  all,  his  profound  knowledge  of  the  human 
heart,  and  that  discernment  which  enabled  him,  as  it  were, 


374  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1814. 

intuitively  to  discover  the  peculiar  propensity  and  character 
of  the  mind  of  each  individual  whom  he  addressed,  to- 
gether with  his  tact  in  adopting  that  mode  of  address  best 
suited  to  eachj  rendered  him  almost  irresistible,  and,  I  be- 
lieve, ultimately  secured  the  success  of  the  great  measure 
which  he  advocated. 

The  law  for  the  better  establishment  of  common 
schools,  was  re-modelled  and  improved  by  a  new  bill 
drawn  by  Mr.  Hawley,  which  passed  both  houses  on  the 
15th  April.  By  this  law,  most  of  the  provisions  contain- 
ed in  the  statute  of  1812  were  re-enacted;  but  they  were 
arranged  in  better  order,  and  some  new  regulations  were 
introduced,  the  most  important  of  w^hich,  was,  that  the 
tr.  stees  of  a  school  district,  by  consent  of  a  majority  of 
the  legal  voters  in  such  district,  might  exonerate  all  such 
poor  persons  from  paying  for  the  tuition  of  their  children, 
as  they  should  deem  proper,  and  collect  the  sum,  so  re- 
mitted, from  those  inhabitants  whom  they  adjudged  able 
to  pay  school  taxes. 

It  is  gratifying  to  perceive  that  the  members  of  this  le- 
gislature, although  so  nearly  equally  divided  into  two 
parties,  and  so  highly  excited  on  political  questions,  cor- 
dially united  to  advance  the  cause  of  science  and  popular 
education. 

There  were,  during  this  session,  applications  by  sixteen 
associations,  for  bank  charters.  The  times  afforded  a  fine 
harvest  for  bankers.  They  could  issue  their  own  notes 
as  money,  without  being  compelled  to  pay  them.  Such 
was  the  peculiar  attitude  of  the  national  administration, 
in  relation  to  the  New-England  states,  and  such  was  the 
financial  condition  of  the  country,  that  the  suspension  of 
specie  payments  by  the  bankers  was  considered  an  evi- 
dence of  patriotism.  What  banker  would  not  be  a  pa- 
triot, if  he  could  lend  his  notes  as  cash,  and,  by  a  refusal 
to  pay  them,  acquire   the  character  of  one  1     Some  of 


1814.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  375 

these  applications  were  successful  in  the  assembly,  but  all 
failed  in  the  senate.  At  the  very  time  when  so  great  a 
rage  for  bank  charters  prevailed,  and  found  so  much  favor 
in  the  assembly,  Mr.  Cole's  bill,  authorizing  any  associa- 
tion to  bank  under  certain  restrictions,  was  rejected,  in 
that  house,  by  the  strong  vote  of  sixty-six  to  twenty-four. 
Another  proof  that  the  real  question  to  be  decided,  on  an 
application  for  the  incorporation  of  a  bank,  is  between  the 
monopolizers  and  those  who  desire  to  become  such. 

On  the  5th  of  February  a  meeting  of  a  few  citizens, 
claiming  to  be  Cllntonians,  but  really  the  personal  friends 
of  Solomon  Southwick,  was  held  in  Albany,  of  which 
Sebastian  Visscher  was  chairman,  and  Samuel  A.  Foote 
was  secretary;  at  which  Mr.  Southwick  was  nominated  a 
candidate  for  the  senate  from  the  eastern  district. 

Mr.  Southwick,  notwithstanding  his  immense  receipts 
as  state  printer,  and  what  he  was  supposed  to  have  received 
for  acting  as  agent  for  the  Bank  of  America,*  was  now 
pretty  well  known  to  be  greatly  insolvent.  As  a  politi- 
cian, he  was  also  bankrupt.  A  few  only  of  old  election- 
eering hacks,  broken  down  men  in  fame  and  fortune,  of 
the  democratic  party,  adhered  to  him.  Mr.  Foote  was,  it 
is  true,  a  promising  young  man;  but  he  was,  at  that  time, 
scarcely  twenty-one  years  old.  He  had  had  no  political 
experience,  nor  did  he  then  know  the  estimation  in  which 
Mr.  Southwick  was  generally  held,  otherwise,  it  is  pre- 
fjumed,  he  would  not  have  appeared  as  an  officer  of  that 
meeting.  The  federalists  held  a  majority,  as  they  believed, 
in  the  eastern  district,  and  they,  of  course,  did  not  wish  to 
be  troubled  with  Mr.  Southwick. 

To  guard  against  the  consequence,  and  make  up  for  the 
loss  of  the  few  republicans  who  might  vote  for  Southwick, 

*  About  this,  there  is  much  donbt.  Mr.  S.  aUeged,  that  instead  of  receiving 
money  from  that  institution,  be  had  lost  by  it,  because  he  bad  paid  from  his  own 
pocket  large  sums  m  procuring  the  charter,  which  the  bank  had  refused  to  reim- 
burse 


376  POLITICAL    HISTORTt  [1814. 

the  republican  party,  in  the  district,  nominated  Guert  Van 
Schoonhoven,  a  gentleman  who  had  always  belonged  to 
the  federal  party,  but  who  gave  some  indications  of  a  dis- 
position to  support  the  war. 

In  the  sequel,  it  appeared  that  Mr.  Van  Schoonhoven 
received  more  federal  than  Mr.  Southwick  did  republican 
votesj  for,  of  the  two  senators  then  to  be  elected  from  the 
eastern  district,  Mr.  Geo.  Tibbits,  one  of  the  regular  fede- 
ral candidates,  was  elected,  while  Mr.  Southwick  was 
beaten  by  Mr.  Van  Schoonhoven. 

I  The  election  in  April  terminated  almost  universally,  in 
this  state,  in  favor  of  the  republican  party.  The  city  of 
New-York  elected  republican  members  of  the  assembly, 
and  several  other  counties  changed  from  federal  to  demo- 
cratic, so  that  there  was  a  considerable  democratic  major- 
ity in  that  branch  of  the  legislature.  The  change  in  the 
election  of  members  of  congress  was  equally  great,  twenty 
of  the  members  elect  being  republican. 

The  senators  chosen  at  this  election,  were  Darius  Crosby 
from  the  southern  district,  Moses  I.  Cantine  and  William 
Ross  from  the  middle,  George  Tibbits  and  Guert  Van 
Schoonhoven  from  the  eastern,  and  Philetus  Swift,  Chaun- 
cey  Loomis,  Bennet  Bicknell  and  John  I.  Pendergast  from 
the  western;  all  of  them  republicans,  except  Mr.  Tibbits. 


1814.]  OF    NEW-YOKK.  377 

CHAPTER   XX. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1814,  TO  MAY  1,  1816. 

In  the  month  of  August,  a  small  squadron  of  British 
vessels  of  war,  containing  some  land  forces,  sailed  up  the 
Chesapeake  and  effected  a  landing  of  their  troops,  who 
marched  into  the  interior  with  a  view  of  capturing  the 
city  of  Washington.  Some  slight  resistance  was  made 
at  Bladensburgh,  within  about  five  miles  of  the  capitol,but 
the  attack  was  not  anticipated,  no  regular  troops  were  in 
the  neighborhood,  and  a  few  regiments  of  raw  militia, 
suddenly  collected  from  the  District  of  Columbia  and  its 
vicinity,  constituted  mainly  the  American  force,  which 
was  soon  put  to  flight.  The  British  troops  after  this  skir- 
mish, marched  into  the  city  of  Washington,  destroyed 
some  of  the  public  stores  at  the  navy  yard,  set  fire  to  the 
president's  house,  and  blew  up  the  capitol.  The  next 
morning,  however,  they  retreated,  and  with  all  convenient 
dispatch  the  troops  were  re-embarked.  This  outrage 
produced  considerable  feeling  even  in  the  minds  of 
the  federalists.  Meetings  of  all  parties  were  held  in 
New-York,  and  in  several  other  places  in  the  state,  at 
which  resolutions  were  adopted  to  support  the  govern- 
ment in  repelling  invasion,  and  indicating  that  there  ought 
to  be  a  suspension  of  all  mere  party  controversies  until 
the  foreign  enemy  should  be  driven  from  our  borders. 

The  citizens  of  the  city  of  New- York,  greatly  alarmed 
for  the  safety  of  that  city,  organized  themselves  into  mili- 
tary corps  and  volunteered  to  attend  at  regular  hours  for 
the  purpose  of  drilling. 

Mr.  Clinton  as  mayor, by  his  public  addresses  and  by  his 
influence  with  the  city  corporation,  did  much  to  keep  alive 


378  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1814. 

a  spirit  of  patriotism,  and  to  aid  the  national  government 
with  funds  to  sustain  its  sinking  credit. 

Money  was  required.  The  banks  would  not  loan  their 
bills  without  better  security  than  the  stock  or  treasury 
notes  of  the  United  States.  It  was,  however,  understood 
that  if  treasury  notes  were  deposited,  endorsed  by  Gov. 
Tompkins,  they  would  advance  some  four  or  five  hundred 
thousand  dollars  to  be  expended  in  erecting  fortifications 
for  the  defence  of  the  port  of  New-York.  Mr.  Rufus 
King,  on  being  informed  of  this,  called  upon  the  governor 
and  stated  to  him  that  the  time  had  arrived  when  it  was 
the  duty  of  every  man  to  put  his  all  at  the  requisition  of 
the  government  and  that  he  himself  was  ready  to  do  this. 
Mr.  Tompkins  replied,  he  should  be  obliged  to  act  on  his 
own  responsibility  and  should  be  ruined.  "  Then,"  said 
Mr.  King,  "  ruin  yourself  if  it  becomes  necessary  to  save 
the  country,  and  I  pledge  you  my  honor  that  I  will  sup- 
port you  in  whatever  you  do."  These  sentiments  are  the 
more  honorable  to  Mr.  King,  when  we  consider  that  he 
was  then  the  prominent  leader  of  the  opponents  of  Mr. 
Madison. 

Gov.  Tompkins  endorsed  the  notes  and  the  money  was 
advanced  by  the  banks.* 

Upon  the  capture  of  Washington,  Gen.  Armstrong  re- 
signed his  office  as  secretary  of  war. 

The  citizens  of  the  district  of  Columbia  were  clamor- 
ous against  Gen.  Armstrong,  and  charged  the  disgrace  and 
injury  they  had  received  from  the  invasion  of  the  British, 
to  his  mismanagement  and  neglect.  I  am  utterly  incom- 
petent to  criticise  the  conduct  of  military  men,  and  if  this 
were  not  so,  it  does  not  come  within  the  scope  of  these 
sketches,  to  attempt  such  criticism.  I  will  merely  state 
that  Gen.  Armstrong  and  the  few  friends  who  adhered  to 
him,  took    quite  a    different   view  of  his  conduct.     I  re- 

*  See  correspondence  between  Tompkins  and  Mclntyre. 


1814.]  OF  ,  NEW- YORK.  379 

mark  further,  that  Mr.  Monroe  was  then  secretary  of  state, 
and  a  rival  candidate  with  Armstrong  for  the  presidency; 
that  as  I  have  before  observed,  Gov.  Tompkins  was  also 
a  candidate  for  the  same  station,  and  that  it  was  most 
clearly  the  interest,  first  of  Mr.  Madison,  to  fix  on  some 
Scape  goat,  on  whose  shoulders  to  saddle  this  disgrace; 
secondly,  of  Mr.  Monroe  to  cast  from  the  cabinet  a  man 
whose  pretensions  were  directly  at  war  with  his  own,  and 
thirdly,  of  Gov.  Tompkins  to  get  rid  of  a  formidable 
rival  from  his  own  state.  What  effect  the  combined  ac- 
tion of  these  men  might  have  upon  their  own  political 
friends,  (for  Gen.  Armstrong,  before  this  disaster  happen- 
ed, was  sufficiently  odious  to  the  federalists,)  may  readily 
be  imagined.  Gen.  Armstrong  did  not  make  the  least 
effort  to  avert  the  fate  that  seemed  to  await  him.  He  re- 
tired in  sullen  silence  from  the  administration  to  his  resi- 
dence at  Red  Hook,  and  has  never  since  intermeddled  with 
state  or  national  politics,  except  by  occasional  confidential 
communications  to  his  old  and  constant  friend  Judge 
Spencer,  and  one  or  two  others. 

It  is  rumored  that  he  has  employed  himself  in  writing 
the  history  of  the  late  war.  If  that  rumor  is  true,  and 
should  his  work  be  published,  it  will  be  read  with  great 
avidity.  That  his  means  of  accurately  knowing  what 
actually  took  place  during  the  war,  are  equal  if  not  supe- 
rior to  any  other  person;  that  he  possesses  a  mighty  intel- 
lect, all  will  admit;  and  if  his  history  shall  not  be  too 
much  tinged  with  a  gloomy,  jealous  and  vindictive  spirit, 
it  will  beyond  question  be  invaluable.* 

In  consequence  of  the  exposed  condition  of  the  coun- 
try, and  the  danger  of  invasion  at  several  points  by  the 
enemy,  the  governor,  by  proclamation,  convened  an  extra 
session  of  the  legislature.  They  met  on  the  26th  Septem- 
ber, and  Samuel  Young,  of  whom  I  shall  have  often  occa- 

*  I  have  since  learned  this  work  had  been  published  v/hen  the  above  was  wrilien 


380  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1814. 

sion  hereafter  to  speak,  was  chosen  speaker  of  the  assem- 
bly, and  Aaron  Clark,  clerk. 

The  speech  of  the  governor  related  almost  exclusively 
to  the  war  and  the  suggestion  of  measures  for  its  vigorous 
prosecution.  The  speech  was  cordially  approved  by  both 
branches  of  the  legislature. 

The  republican  majority  in  the  two  houses  did  not  re- 
main idle  a  single  moment.  They  did  not  content  themselves 
with  words,  but  had  recourse  to  the  most  vigorous  action  to 
put  the  state  in  an  attitude  of  defence  against  the  enemy, 
and  to  aid  the  war  measures  of  the   general   government. 

They  first  passsed  an  act  to  raise  the  pay  of  the  militia, 
while  in  the  service  of  the  United  States,  over  the  com- 
pensation allowed  by  the  general  government,  so  that  a 
subaltern  should  receive  fifteen  dollars  per  month,  a  musi- 
cian or  corporal  fourteen  dollars,  and  a  private  thirteen  dol- 
lars per  month.  This  provision  extended  as  well  to  those 
who  had  served  since  March  13,  1814,  as  those  who 
should  be  called  into  service.  The  payment  was  to  be 
made  from  the  state  treasury. 

They  next  passed  an  act  to  encourage  privateering,  by 
authorising  associations  for  that  purpose.  The  passage 
of  this  act  was  resisted  by  the  federalists  in  the  legislature, 
and  by  the  federal  members  of  the  council  of  revision. 

Chancellor  Kent  interposed  a  series  of  objections  in  the 
form  of  a  protest  evincing  great  learning  and  ability, 
against  the  act,  as  inconsistent  with  the  genius  of  our  con- 
stitution, and  at  war  with  the  principles  of  civilization 
and  the  spirit  of  the  age.  But  a  majority  of  the  council  ap- 
proved and  passed  the  bill.  The  publication  of  this  pro- 
test called  out  Col.  Young,  the  speaker  of  the  assembly, 
who  in  several  numbers,  published  in  the  Albany  Argus, 
under  the  signature  of  Juris  Consul  tus,  defended  with  great 
talent  and  ingenuity,  the  proceedings  of  the  legislature. 
The  ability  displayed  in  these  essays,  first  made  Mr.  Young 


1814.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  381 

known  to  the  state  as  a  man  of  distinguished  talents. 
They  were  answered  by  the  chancellor,  and  the  contro- 
versy was  afterwards  pursued  by  Mr.  Van  Buren,  who 
wrote  under  the  signature  of  Amicus  Juris  Consultus.  The 
dissertations  elicited  by  this  controversy,  both  from  Chan- 
cellor Kent  Col.  Young,  and  Mr.  Van  Buren,  are  well 
worthy  of  preservation,  as  splendid  displays  of  learning 
and  talent,  and  as  elegant  specimens  of  correct  logical 
reasoning. 

The  same  legislature,  within  a  few  days  after  the  pas- 
sage of  the  last  mentioned  law,  passed  a  bill  to  authorise 
the  raising  of  troops  for  the  defence  of  the  state,  com- 
monly called  the  classification  law.  By  this  act  twelve 
thousand  men  were  to  be  enlisted  by  the  authority  of  the 
state,  for  the  term  of  two  years.  For  the  purpose  of  en- 
suring the  raising  of  that  number  of  men,  the  militia  were 
to  be  classed,  and  each  class  was  to  furnish  its  man.  If 
a  volunteer  from  the  class  could  not  be  obtained,  then  an 
assessment  was  to  be  made  upon  the  members  of  the  class 
in  proportion  to  the  property  held  by  each.  This  bill  be- 
came a  law  on  the  24  th  October. 

On  the  same  day  a  law  was  passed  for  raising  a  corps  of 
sea  fencibles  for  three  years,  consisting  of  twenty  compa- 
nies for  the  defence  of  the  port  of  New-York.  This 
corps  were  to  be  ready  at  a  moment's  warning  to  be  called 
into  actual  service,  in  lieu  of  the  militia.  A  law,  also 
was  passed  for  raising  two  regiments  of  colored  men  for 
three  years,  among  whom  slaves  might  be  enlisted  by  con- 
sent of  their  masters,  who  were  to  be  manumitted  on 
being  honorably  discharged.  Thus  it  seems  that  that  un- 
fortunate class  of  men  were  not  deemed  unworthy  of 
shedding  their  blood  in  defence  of  a  country  and  a  people 
which  had  degraded  and  oppessed  them.  Could  it  have 
been  anticipated  that  Col.  Young,  who  ably  and  zealously 
advocated  this  bill,  would  have  been  found  in  the  conven- 


382  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1S14. 

tion  of  1821,  supporting,  and  probably  by  his  influence, 
procuring  to  be  inserted  in  the  amended  constitution,  a 
clause  which  was  intended  forever  further  to  degrade  this 
down  trodden  race  of  men,  to  whose  aid  he  now,  in  this 
time  of  imminent  peril,  resorted  1* 

Other  laws  were  passed  during  this  short  session  for  re- 
imbursing Gov.  Tompkins  for  expenditures  which  he  had 
incurred,  not  at  the  time  authorised  by  existing  laws,  and 
for  indemnifying  him  for  the  responsibilities  he  had  as- 
sumed, for  appropriating  fifty  thousand  dollars  for  the 
completion  of  the  fortifications  on  Staten  Island,  to  amend 
and  render  less  easy  of  evasion,  the  act  organizing  the 
militia,  also  to  prevent  the  arrest  on  civil  process  of  mili- 
tia men  while  in  the  public  service,  and  to  prevent  all  im- 
proper traffic  or  intercourse  with  the  enemy. 

These  laws  were  most  of  them  opposed  by  the  federal 
members  of  the  legislature,  because  in  some  respects  they 
were  alleged  to  infringe  too  much  on  the  private  rights  of 
the  citizen,  and  because  it  was  the  duty  of  the  national 
government  and  the  main  object  of  its  organization,  to 
provide  for  the  defence  of  the  country,  and  every  part  of 
it  against  a  foreign  enemy.  But  the  truth  was,  the  gene- 
ral government,  by  means  of  its  financial  embarrass- 
ments, and  other  causes,  had  become,  in  a  great  mea- 
sure, powerless,  and  if  the  country  was  to  be  defended 
from  the  common  enemy,  it  was  apparent  that  defence 
must  be  made  principally  by  the  states  as  such. 

The  national  government  by  means  of  its  patronage  is 
strong,  perhaps  too  strong  in  time  of  peace;  in  war,  if  the 
states  choose  to  claim  their  reserved  power,  as  the  eastern 
states  then  did,  it  is  weak  and  inefficient. 

The  prompt  adoption  of  these  war  measures  by  the  le- 
gislature, I  thought  then  and  I  still  think,  was  honorable 
to  the  majority  in  the  two  houses.  Among  the  most  effi- 
cient supporters  of  the  measures  in  the  senate,  were  Van 
•  Sec  Note  A.  vol.  2,  p.  640. 


IS  14.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  383 

Buren  and  Root;  and  in  the  assembly,  the  talents,  zeal  and 
imperturbable  firmness  of  Mr.  Speaker  Young,  were  pow- 
erful means  of  procuring  their  adoption  in  that  body. 

The  legislature,  before  their  adjournment,  which  took 
place  about  the  25th  October,  passed  a  law  removing 
Solomon  Southwick  from  the  office  of  state  printer,  and 
appointing  Jesse  Buel  in  his  place. 

A  convention  chosen  by  the  legislature  of  some  of  the 
eastern  states,  known  as  the  famous  Hartford  Convention, 
was  about  this  time  projected.  In  this  measure  the  state  of 
Massachusetts  took  the  lead.  The  legislature  of  that  state 
was  in  session  during  the  autumn  of  this  year,  and  Gov. 
Strong  had,  in  his  message,  delivered  a  violent  philippic 
against  the  war  and  the  management  of  it.  This  messsge 
was  referred  in  the  senate  to  a  committee,  of  which  Harri- 
son Gray  Otis  was  chairman.  He  made  a  long  report,  in 
which  he  animadverted  with  great  severity  on  the  mea- 
sures pursued  by  the  general  government,  and  concluded 
as  follows  : — 

"  It  is  therefore,  with  great  concern,  that  your  commit- 
tee are  obliged  to  declare  their  conviction,  that  the  consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  under  the  administration  of 
the  persons  in  power,  has  failed  to  secure  to  this  common- 
wealth, and  as  they  believe,  to  the  eastern  section  of  the 
Union,  those  equal  rights  and  benefits,  which  were  the  ob- 
jects of  its  formation,  and  which  they  cannot  relinquish 
without  ruin  to  themselves  and  posterity.  These  griev- 
ances justify  and  require  vigorous,  persevering  and  peace- 
able exertions,  to  unite  those  who  realize  the  sufferings 
and  foresee  the  dangers  of  the  country,  in  some  system  of 
measures  to  obtain  relief,  for  which  the  ordinary  mode 
of  procuring  amendments  to  the  constitution  affords  no 
reasonable  expectation,  in  season  to  prevent  the  comple- 
tion of  its  ruin.  The  people,  however,  possess  the  means 
of  certain  redress;  and   when   their   safety  which  is  the 


384  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1814. 

supreme  law,  is  in  question,  these  means  should  be  prompt- 
ly applied.  The  framers  of  the  constitution  made  provi- 
sions to  amend  defects  which  were  known  to  be  incident 
to  every  human  institution;  and  the  provision  itself  was  not 
less  liable  to  be  found  defective  upon  experiment,  than  other 
parts  of  the  instrument.  When  this  deficiency  becomes  ap- 
parent, no  reason  can  preclude  the  right  of  the  whole  peo- 
ple, who  were  parties  to  it,  to  adopt  another;  and  it  is  not  a 
presumptuous  expectation,  that  a  spirit  of  equity  and  jus- 
tice enlightened  by  experience,  would  enable  them  to  re- 
concile conflicting  interests,and  obviate  the  principal  causes 
of  those  dissentions,  which  unfit  government  for  a  state  of 
peace  and  war,  and  so  amend  the  constitution,  as  to  give 
vigor  and  duration  to  the  union  of  the  states.  But  as  a 
proposition  for  such  a  convention  from  a  single  state, 
would  probably  be  unsccessful,  and  our  danger  admits  not 
of  delay,  it  is  recommended  by  the  committee,  that  in  the 
first  instance,  a  conference  should  be  invited  between  those 
states,  the  affinity  of  whose  interests  is  closest,  and  whose 
habits  of  intercourse,  from  their  local  situation  and  oth- 
er causes,  are  most  frequent;  to  the  end  that  by  a  com- 
parison of  their  sentiments  and  views,  some  mode  of  de- 
fence, suited  to  the  circumstances  and  exigencies  of  those 
states,  and  measures  for  accelerating  the  return  of  public 
prosperity,  may  be  devised;  and  also  to  enable  the  de- 
legates from  those  states,  should  they  deem  it  expedientj 
to  lay  the  foundation  for  a  radical  reform  in  the  national 
compact,  by  inviting  to  a  future  convention,  a  deputation 
from  all  the  states  in  the  union.  They,  therefore,  report 
the  following  resolves — which  are  submitted. 

H.  G.  OTIS,  per  order. 

Resolved  J  That  the  calamities  of  war  being  now  brought 

home  to  this  territory  of  the  commonwealth;  a  portion  of 

it  being  in  the  occupation  of  the  enemy,  our  sea  coast  and 

rivers  being  invaded  in  several  places,  and  in  all  exposed 


1814.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  385 

to  immediate  danger;  the  people  of  Massachusetts  are  im- 
pelled by  the  duty  of  self-defence,  and  by  all  the  feelings 
and  attachments  which  bind  good  citizens  to  their  coun- 
try, to  unite  in  the  most  vigorous  measures  for  defending 
the  state  and  expelling  the  invader,  and  no  party  feelings 
or  political  dissentions  can  ever  interfere  with  the  dis- 
charge of  this  exalted  duty. 

Resolvedj  That  provision  be  made  by  law  for  raising 
by  voluntary  enlistment,  for  twelve  months,  or  during  the 
war,  a  number  of  troops  not  exceeding  ten  thousand,  to 
be  organized  and  officered  by  the  governor,  for  the  defence 
of  the  state. 

Resolvedy  That  the  governor  be  authorized  to  accept 
the  services  of  any  volunteers,  and  to  organize  them  as 
part  of  the  aforesaid  troops,  who  shall  hold  themselves  in 
readiness  to  march  at  a  moment's  warning,  to  any  part  of 
the  commonwealth,  who  shall  be  entitled  to  full  pay  and 
rations,  when  in  actual  service,  and  to  a  just  compensation 
short  of  full  pay,  to  be  provided  by  law,  during  the 
entire  term  of  their  enlistment. 

Resolved  J  That  the  governor  be  authorised  to  borrow, 
from  time  to  time,  a  sum  not  exceeding  one  million  of  dol- 
lars, at  an  interest  not  exceeding  six  per  centj  and  that 
the  faith  of  this  government  be  pledged  to  provide  funds 
at  the  next  session  of  this  legislature  at  furthest,  for  the 
payment  of  the  interest  on  the  sums  borrowed. 

Resolved^  That  persons  be  appointed  as  delegates  from 
the  legislature,  to  meet  and  confer  with  delegates  from  the 
states  of  New-England  or  any  of  them,  upon  the  subjects 
of  their  public  grievances  and  concerns,  and  upon  the  best 
means  of  preserving  our  resources,  and  of  defence  against 
the  enemy,  and  to  devise  and  suggest  for  adoption  by 
those  respective  states,  such  measures  as  they  may  deem 
expedient:  and  also  to  take  measures,  if  they  shall  think 
proper,  for   procuring   a   convention    of  all    the   United 

26 


386  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1814. 

States,  in  order  to  revise  the  constitution  thereof,  and  more 
effectually  to  secure  the  support  and  attachment  of  all  the 
people,  by  placing  all  upon  the  basis  of  fair  representa- 
tion. 

Resolvedj  That  a  circular  letter  from  this  legislature, 
signed  by  the  president  of  the  senate,  and  the  speaker  of 
the  house  of  representatives,  be  addressed  to  the  execu- 
tive government  of  each  of  said  states,  to  be  communica- 
ted to  their  legislatures,  explaining  the  objects  of  the  pro- 
posed conference,  inviting  them  to  concur  in  sending  dele- 
gates thereto. 

This  report  was  adopted  on  the  12th  October,  as  ap- 
pears by  the  following  extract  from  the  minutes  kept  by 
the  senate  of  Massachusetts: — 

«  IN  SENATE— Ocf.  12,  1814." 

"  Important  Report. — The  report  of  the  joint  committee 
on  the  public  defence,  was  again  debated;  and  was  advo- 
cated by  the  Hon.  Messrs,  Otis,  Quincy,  Blake,  White, 
and  others;  and  opposed  by  the  Hon.  Messrs.  Holmes, 
Moody,  Fuller,  Kilham,  and  others — when  it  was  accepted, 
twenty-two  to  twelve.  The  blanks  being  filled  up,  the 
number  of  delegates  from  this  state  is  to  be  twelve,  and 
the  convention  is  to  meet  in  Hartford,  the  15th  December 
ensuing." 

These  proceedings,  on  their  face,  were  of  a  character 
highly  alarming.  The  state  of  Massachusetts  had,  before 
this  time,  refused  to  put  their  militia,  who,  according  to  a 
law  of  congress,  were  called  into  the  service  of  the  United 
States,  under  the  command,  or  in  any  respect  under  the 
control,  of  officers  appointed  by  the  national  government. 

With  this  avowed  determination,  the  state,  it  will  be 
perceived  by  the  above  resolutions,  determine  to  raise  an 
army  of  twelve  thousand  men.  They  next  resolve  to 
raise  by  loan,  in  addition  to  the  ordinary  revenue,  a  mil- 
lion of  dollars,  which,  of  course,  was  to  be  expended  un- 


1814.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  387 

der  the  direction  of  the  state  authorities;  and  they  pro- 
ceed further,  to  legalize,  so  far  as  the  state  could  legalize, 
a  meeting  of  men  unknown  to  either  the  state  or  national 
constitutions,  and  to  clothe  them  with  political  power. 
They  invite  and  earnestly  urge  the  other  disaffected  states 
to  join  them  in  this  proposed  congress.  It  is  impossible 
to  view  the  project  in  any  other  light  than  as  revolutionary 
in  its  character.  Two  or  three  of  the  other  New-England 
states  became  parties  to  this  plan  of  a  convention,  and 
sent  deputies  to  it.  What  the  real  object  of  this  move 
ment  was,  yet  remains  in  doubt.  The  peace,  which  was 
so  soon  after  the  meeting  of  the  convention  announced, 
disconcerted  and  defeated  the  objects  of  the  projectors, 
whatever  those  objects  were.  On  the  one  hand,  it  was 
contended,  that  the  promoters  of  this  convention  had 
nothing  more  in  view,  in  any  event,  than  to  effect,  if  pos- 
sible, a  reform  in  the  administration  of  the  government, 
and  to  extort  from  the  administration  a  modicum  of  its 
patronage;  while,  on  the  other,  it  has  been  affirmed  that 
the  original  intention  was  treasonable;  that  the  New- 
England  states  meant  to  secede  from  the  union;  negotiate 
a  separate  peace  with  Great  Britain;  and  form  an  inde- 
pendent government,  perhaps,  in  alliance  with  the  British. 
Might  I  be  permitted  to  offer  a  conjecture,  I  should  say, 
that,  to  me,  it  is  very  probable  that  Massachusetts,  and 
the  other  New-England  states,  assumed  this  menacing  at- 
titude in  the  expectation  of  coercing  the  general  adminis- 
tration to  concede  to  them  a  portion,  if  not  the  whole, 
of  the  national  patronage;  but  with  a  determination,  in 
case  this  hope  should  prove  ill  founded,  that  they  would 
secede  from  the  union,  "  peaceably,  if  they  could,  forcibly, 
if  they  must." 

How  far  the  federalists  of  the  state  of  New-York  ap- 
proved these  violent  proceedings  at  the  east,  is  not  dis- 


388  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1814. 

tinctly  known.  I  myself,  know,  and  could  name,  some 
very  distinguished  federal  politicians  of  this  state,  who 
were  decided  in  their  opinions  against  the  Hartford  con- 
vention* while  there  is  reason  to  believe,  that  many  others, 
either  secretly  or  openly,  encouraged  their  eastern  friends. 
I  observe,  at  that  time,  an  article  in  the  Albany  Register, 
condemning  the  measure;  to  which,  an  anonymous  writer 
in  the  Albany  Gazette  replied,  justifying  it.  One  thing 
is  very  evident,  that  the  federalists  of  New-York,  as  a 
partyj  never  sanctioned  the  Hartford  Convention. 

One  movement  of  the  federal  members  of  the  legisla- 
ture, during  the  short  extra  session,  deserves  attention, 
because  it  took  place  about  the  time,  or  rather  a  few  days 
before,  the  scheme  of  the  Hartford  Convention  was  devel- 
oped by  Mr.  Otis,  in  the  Massachusetts  legislature.  On 
the  27th  day  of  September  a  committee  of  the  federal 
members  of  the  legislature  issued  the  following  circular, 
which  I  have  copied  from  Mr.  William  Colman's  New- 
York  Evening  Post,  a  leading  federal  paper,  so  much  so, 
that  Mr.  Colman  was  called  Field  Marshal  Colman: — 

"  Albany,  September  27,  1814. 

"  Sir — The  legislature  convened  at  this  place  yesterday, 
and  commenced  their  proceedings  in  the  true  Jacobinic 
spirit  of  proscription.  It  is  therefore  evident,  that  concili- 
ation is  out  of  the  question  with  our  political  opponents. 
We  understand  that  the  majority  in  the  two  houses  have 
several  violent  and  extensive  projects  in  contemplation. 
Hence,  it  is  desirable,  that  the  federalists,  throughout  the 
state,  should  have  a  perfect  understanding  about  the  course 
which  the  party  are  to  pursue.  To  effect  this,  it  is  pro- 
posed to  have  a  meeting  of  delegates  from  different  coun- 
ties, in  this  city,  on  the  fifth  day  of  October  next,  to  con- 
sult and  decide  on  that  subject. 

•  Abraham  Vak  V«cht«k  and  Daribl  Cadt. 


1814.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  389 

"  Permit  us  to  request  you  to  confer  with  our  friends  in 
your  county,  and  to  make  arrangements  to  send  a  delega- 
tion to  the  proposed  meeting. 

We  are,  with  great  respect, 

Your  obedient  servants, 
James  Emott,  Henry  Livingston, 

Abr.  Van  Vechten,        Theodore  Sill, 
Saml.  M.  Lockwood,    J.  R.  Van  Rensselaer,^ 
Daniel  Hale,  William  A.  Duer, 

George  Tibbits,  Samuel  Stewart, 

Peter  Jay  Munro,  Gerrit  Wendell, 

Committee/' 

Why  this  state  convention  1  No  governor  was  to  be 
chosen  for  the  space  of  nearly  two  years,  and  no  election, 
of  any  kind,  was  to  be  held  for  more  than  six  months 
thereafter.  It  is  difficult  to  account  for  this  call,  without 
supposing  that  one  object  of  a  state  convention  was,  to 
take  into  consideration  the  conduct  of  the  eastern  federal- 
ists. I  am  not,  however,  aware  that  a  convention  was 
held,  in  pursuance  of  the  request  of  the  legislative  com- 
mittee; at  any  rate,  I  am  quite  confident  no  such  conven- 
tion was  publicly  held.  If  I  am  correct  in  this,  the  fair 
inference  is,  that  the  project  of  the  Hartford  Convention 
was  not  generally  favorably  received  by  the  federalists  of 
New-York.    [JVote  C] 

The  intelligence  of  the  laws  passed  by  the  New-York 
legislature,  in  aid  of  the  war  and  of  the  general  govern- 
ment, at  the  session  in  September  and  October,  was  re- 
reived  at  Washington,  by  Mr.  Madison  and  his  cabinet, 
with  great  joy,  and  the  most  intense  gratification. 

The  extremely  depressed  condition  of  the  national  trea- 
sury, had  rendered  the  United  States  unable  to  recruit 
their  armies,  which  were  daily  diminishing  by  the  expira- 
tion of  the  terras  of  enlistment,  deaths,  and  desertions. 


390  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1^14. 

The  British  government,  now  relieved  from  all  its  Euro- 
pean enemies,  would  exert  its  whole  tremendous  power 
against  America  single  handed,  and  the  determined  and 
powerful  opposition  of  the  eastern  states  to  the  govern- 
ment, unquestionably  added  to  the  alarm  of  the  adminis- 
tration. New-York  held  a  most  important  position. 
Had  she  have  joined  her  moral  and  political  influence 
with  New-England,  it  does  seem  to  me,  the  national  go- 
vernment must  have  come  to  a  stand,  and  that  this  must 
have  been  seen  and  felt  by  the  cool  and  calculating  Mr. 
Madison.  Under  these  painful  apprehensions,  the  news 
from  New-York  was  particularly  consoling  and  cheering. 
I  was  going  to  say,  it  fell  upon  the  ear  of  the  cabinet  like 
a  reprieve  to  a  man  condemned  to  die. 

Gov.  Tompkins  was  considered  the  individual,  to  whom, 
above  all  others,  the  administration  was  most  deeply  in- 
debted. Mr.  Monroe  was  now  acting  secretary  of  war, 
as  well  as  secretary  of  state.  Mr.  Madison  proposed  to 
Gov.  Tompkins  that  Monroe  should  vacate  the  ofl^ce  of 
secretary  of  state,  and  that  he,  (Mr.  T.)  should  be  placed 
at  the  head  of  that  department.  Ever  since  the  alteration 
of  the  United  States  constitution,  in  the  mode  of  choosing 
the  president  and  vice-president,  the  secretary  of  state 
was  considered  heir  apparent  to  the  presidential  chair, 
and,  at  any  rate,  v/as  the  known  and  admitted  favorite  of 
the  president  for  the  time  being.  This  offer,  then,  Mr. 
Tompkins  considered,  and  considering  established  usages, 
perhaps  had  a  right  to  consider,  as  a  commitment,  on  the 
part  of  the  administration,  to  support  him  for  the  next 
president.  Gov.  Tompkins,  however,  declined  accepting 
the  office,  alleging  as  a  reason,  that  he  could  render  more 
service  to  the  nation  as  governor  of  New-York,  than  as 
secretary  of  state  of  the  United  States.  The  popularity 
and  influence  of  Gov.  Tompkins  may  be  said  now  to  have 
been  at  its  zenith.     In  New-York  he  was  all  but  idolized 


1814.  OP   NEW-YORK.  391 

by  a  formidable  and  well  organized  political  party,  who 
held  strong  majorities  in  both  branches  of  the  legislature; 
abroad  he  was  esteemed  and  respected,  and  at  Washington 
the  national  cabinet  had  virtually  declared  him  their  can- 
didate for  the  next  national  executive  vacancy.  He  was, 
in  New-York,  not  only  the  dispenser  of  the  state  patron- 
age, but,  in  the  loose  and  irregular  way  of  transacting 
business  between  the  state  and  national  governments  which 
then  prevailed,  most  of  the  treasury  notes  and  other  secu- 
rities of  the  United  States  passed  through  the  hands  of  the 
governor,  and  payments,  on  the  part  of  the  state  and  na- 
tion, were  many  times  made  through  him,  and  occasionally 
by  him;  so  that  he  was  also  the  dispenser  of  pecuniary 
gratifications.  He  was  auditor,  receiver,  and  paymaster. 
All  good  things,  politically  speaking,  seemed  to  come 
from  the  governor  as  their  source. 

Mr.  Madison,  in  the  latter  part  of  this  year,  thought 
proper  to  remove  Gideon  Granger  from  the  office  of  post- 
master general,  and  to  supply  his  place  by  the  appoint- 
ment of  R.  J.  Meigs,  of  Ohio.  Mr.  Granger  had  held  the 
office  for  twelve  years,  and  had  done  much  towards  im- 
proving and  perfecting  that  important  department;  but 
report  states  that  some  personal  differences  existed  be- 
tween Mr.  Madison  and  Mr.  Granger,  while  the  former 
was  secretary  of  state,  which  were  never  forgotten  by 
him,  and  that  he  expelled  Mr.  G,  from  the  post-office 
ostensibly  because  he  had  been  a  Clintonian,  but  really  on 
account  of  an  old  grudge.  The  immediate  cause  of  the 
removal,  was  the  appointment,  by  Granger,  of  Doct.  Lieb 
post-master  of  Philadelphia. 

The  new  post-master  general,  shortly  after  his  appoint- 
ment, removed  George  W.  Mancius  from  the  office  of 
post-master  at  Albany,  and  appointed  Peter  P.  Dox. 
Mr.  Mancius  was  an  old  Albanian,  beloved  by  all,  not- 
withstanding he  was  nominally  a  federalist.     His  removal 


392  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1815. 

produced  a  strong  sensation  unfavorable  to  the  post-mas- 
ter general. 

The  legislature  met  on  the  31st  day  of  January,  1815, 
and  on  the  next  day  chose  a  council  of  appointment,  con- 
sisting of  Jonathan  Dayton  from  the  southern,  Lucas  El- 
mendorfF  from  the  middle,  Ruggles  Hubbard  from  the 
eastern,  and  Farrand  Stranahan  from  the  western  districts. 
This  council  very  promptly  proceeded  to  remove  all,  or 
nearly  all,  the  federal  incumbents  from  offices  held  subject 
to  the  pleasure  of  the  council. 

Mr.  Van  Vechten  was,  of  course,  removed  from  the  of- 
fice of  attorney  general,  and  Mr. Van  Buren  was  appointed 
nis  successor.  This  appointment  was  made  by  the  casting 
vote  of  the  governor.  Mr.  Elmendorff  and  Mr.  Dayton 
voted  for  Mr.  Van  Buren,  and  Messrs.  Stranahan  and 
Hubbard  for  Mr.  John  Woodworth.  The  circumstance  is 
too  trifling  to  deserve  notice,  except  as  an  evidence  of  a 
jealous  feeling  which  then  began  to  exist  between  Judge 
Spencer  and  Mr.  Van  Buren.  I  do  not  impute  the  vote 
of  Hubbard  to  the  influence  of  Judge  Spencer.  Mr.  H. 
was  from  Troy,  and  Judge  Wooodworth  had  many  and 
powerful  friends  in  that  place,  and  in  Mr.  Hubbard's  dis- 
trict. This  accounts  well  enough  for  the  vote  of  Mr. 
Hubbard.  But  Stranahan  had  no  personal  partialities  nor 
any  influential  friends,  in  his  district,  in  favor  of  Wood- 
worth;  on  the  contrary,  they  were  for  Van  Buren.  The 
truth  is,  Stranahan,  at  that  period  of  his  political  life,  was 
much,  if  not  entirely,  devoted  to  the  views  of  Judge 
Spencer.  I  apprehend  that  Judge  Spencer  perceived  that 
Mr.  Van  Buren  was  acquiring  a  greater  influence  in  the 
state  than  the  judge  desired  he  should  possess,  and,  there- 
fore, persuaded  Mr.  Stranahan  to  endeavor  to  defeat  his 
appointment.  From  this  period,  down  to  1817,  when 
Mr.  Clinton  was  nominated  for  governor,  Mr.  Van  Buren 
and  Judge  Spencer,  though  both  of  them  acting  with  the 


1815.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  393 

republican  party,  and  in  good  faith  too,  were  very  much 
inclined  to  thwart  the  individual  views  of  each  other. 

On  some  of  the  first  days  in  February,  Nathan  Sanford 
was  chosen  senator  of  the  United  States,  to  fill  the  seat 
rendered  vacant  by  thp  expiration  of  the  term  of  service 
of  Gen.  German.  The  moment  Gen.  Armstrong  resigned 
the  war  department  it  was  given  out,  (and  I  believe  the 
giving  out  came  from  Judge  Spencer,)  that  the  ex-secreta- 
ry must  be  elected  to  the  United  States  senate.  Mr. 
Spencer  was  no  doubt  anxious  for  this  result,  but  it  was 
soon  found  the  current  in  the  legislature  against  Arm- 
strong was  quite  too  strong  to  be  arrested.  Gov.  Tomp- 
kins, though  extremely  adroit  in  avoiding  the  taking  any 
part  openly  in  the  controversies  which  occurred  among 
his  political  friends,  could  not,  on  this  occasion,  remain 
idle.  Beyond  all  question,  both  he  and  Van  Buren,  must 
have  taken  a  very  active  part  to  put  at  rest,  at  all  events, 
the  claims  of  Gen.  Armstrong.* 

On  the  12th  of  February  the  news  arrived  in  Albany 
that  a  treaty  of  peace  between  Great  Britain  and  the  Uni 
ted  States,  had  been  signed  at  Ghent,  on  the  24th  day  of 
December.     It  is  unnecessary  to  say  that  the  intelligence  of 


*  After  it  was  found  that  Gen.  Armstrong  could  not  be  elected,  Judge  Spencer 
himself  was  announced  as  a  candidate';  but  the  current  in  favor  of  Mr.  Sanford, 
which  had  been  produced  by  Gov.  Tompkins  and  Mr.  Van  Buren,  could  not  be  re- 
sisted. 

Previous  to  the  assemblage  of  the  caucus  to  nominate  a  senator,  it  was  well 
ascertained  that  a  majority  were  in  favor  of  Sanford.  When  the  caucus  convened 
Mr.  Van  Buren  stated  that  he  did  not  believe  Judge  Spencer  would  consent  to  be 
a  candidate.  This  statement  was  probably  made  with  a  view  to  induce  the 
friends  of  the  Judge  to  withdraw  his  name,  Mr.  V.  B,  believing  that  they  must 
have  known  there  was  a  majority  against  him. 

The  friends  of  the  Judge,  however,  insisted  that  he  would  serve  as  a  senator,  if 
elected,  and  moved  that  a  committee  be  appointed  to  call  on  him  and  request  his 
response  to  the  question,  whether  he  was,  or  was  not,  a  candidate.  This  motion, 
although  opposed  by  Mr.  Van  Buren,  was  carried,  and  a  committee  raised  accord- 
ingly, who  reported  that  the  Judge  declined  to  be  a  candidate,  "  because  he  would 
not  put  himself  in  competition  with  so  young  a  mon  as  Mr.  Sanford." 

It  is  not  improbable  that  the  committee  advised  Judge  Spencer  of  what  tbey 
believed  would  be  the  result  of  a  contest  between  him  and  Sanford. 


394  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1815. 

this  event  produced  the  most  lively  sensations  of  joy, 
among  all  classes  in  the  community,  excepting  only  those 
contractors  and  office  holders  who  were  making  great 
gains  by  the  war,  and  perhaps  we  ought  to  except,  now 
and  then,  a  cold,  calculating,  selfish  politician  of  the  fede- 
ral stamp,  whose  party  zeal  absorbed  his  love  of  country, 
and  who  believed  that  the  administration  must  have  been 
broken  down  had  the  war  continued,  and  who  felt  that  the 
news  of  peace  had  destroyed  all  the  prospects  of  the  party 
with  which  he  was  associated.  It  is,  however,  undoubt- 
edly true,  that  a  large  majority  of  both  parties  most  sin- 
cerely rejoiced  when  the  news  of  the  great  event  arrived. 

To  add  to  the  exultation  and  general  joy,  about  this 
time  information  was  received  of  the  splendid  victory  of 
New-Orleans,  obtained  on  the  eighth  of  January,  by  the 
American  troops  under  the  command  of  Gen.  Jackson. 

For  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  past,  our  states- 
men and  orators  have  boasted  of  our  success  in  the  late 
war  J  and  the  heroism  and  bravery  of  our  soldiers  and  sea- 
menj  the  patriotism  of  our  citizens;  and  the  strength  and 
energy  of  our  government,  as  demonstrated  by  that  war. 
The  glory  achieved  by  the  nation,  during  this  contest,  has 
been  extolled  at  the  hustings,  eulogised  in  the  halls  of 
legislation,  and  celebrated  in  song.  This  may  be  all  right; 
it  is,  in  fact,  rightj  for,  in  truth,  great  fortitude  and  spirit 
was  evinced,  both  by  our  seamen  and  soldiers,  and  very 
decisive  evidence  was  furnished  of  the  attachment  of  the 
great  mass  of  the  people  to  the  government  of  their  own 
choice,  and  of  their  determination  to  support  and  defend 
the  liberty  and  independence  of  the  nation.  Still,  the 
honest  and  candid  historian,  acting  with  good  faith  towards 
posterity,  is  bound  to  state,  that  at  the  time  when  peace 
was  announced  in  this  country,  it  was  in  a  condition  alarm- 
ingly perilous.  The  treasury  was  empty,  and  the  credit 
of  the  national  government  was  quite  exhausted.     I  will 


1815.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  395 

not  say  it  could  not  command  a  dollar  of  real  money,  but 
I  will  say  it  could  not,  with  all  its  means  and  its  power, 
without  the  most  ruinous  sacrifice,  get  the  control  of  a 
million,  or  even  half  a  million,  of  the  only  money  known 
to  the  constitutionj  which  is  gold  and  silver.  The  army 
of  the  United  States,  though  liberally  supplied  with  offi- 
cers, had  not,  at  that  time,  in  its  ranks  more  than  eight 
thousand  privates,  enlisted  for  five  years,  or  during  the 
war,  and  the  government  possessed  no  means  of  recruiting 
its  ranks;  and,  as  I  have  said  before,  the  whole  naval  and 
military  power  of  Great  Britain  was  ready  to  be  put  in 
requisition  for  the  prostration  of  this  country.  To  add  to 
all  these  difficulties,  the  cloud  which  for  two  years  had 
been  gathering  in  the  east,  was  now  ready  to  burst.  I 
will,  nevertheless,  add,  that  I  have  not  a  shadow  of  doubt 
that  had  the  war  continued,  notwithstanding  these  difficul- 
ties and  embarrassments,  the  whole  country,  and  all  par- 
ties in  it,  would  have  eventually  roused  and  repelled  the 
invader.  But  the  news  of  peace  came,  and  with  it  all 
danger  vanished. 

The  22nd  of  February,  Washington's  birth-day,  was 
designated  as  a  day  for  rejoicing  and  festivity.  I  was  in 
Albany  on  that  day  and  evening,  and  I  could  not  but  ob- 
serve, that  notwithstanding  the  prevalent  hilarity,  politi- 
cians were  anxiously  looking  ahead  for  future  advance 
ment.  Among  the  various  pageantry  exhibited,  were 
several  transparencies,  with  inscriptions  suited  to  the  occa- 
sion; but  at  the  Eagle  Tavern  I  noticed  a  splendid  trans- 
parency exhibiting  in  large  capitals  the  names  of  Tomp- 
kins and  Crawford.  The  indication  intended  was  most 
obvious. 

The  war  having  thus  happily  terminated,  the  party  in 
power  felt  more  at  liberty  to  distribute  the  patronage  in 
such  away  as  to  gratify  their  own  individual  views.  Ja- 
cob Rutsen  Van  Rensselaer  wasremoved  from  the  office  of 


396  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1815. 

secretary  of  state,  and  Gen.  Peter  B.  Porter  was  appointed 
in  his  place.  Gen.  Porter  had  honorably  distinguished  him- 
self in  the  army  on  the  Niagara  frontier  during  the  war, 
and  was  besides  justly  esteemed  as  a  man  of  the  first  order 
of  intellect.  It  does  not  appear  that  he  solicited  the  ap- 
pointment. Indeed  his  business  required  his  personal  at- 
tention at  Black  Rock,  where  he  resided,  and  besides,  he 
was  in  the  spring  of  1814,  elected  to  congress.  He  was, 
I  understand,  proposed  by  Gov.  Tompkins,  and  a  majority 
of  the  council  of  appointment  without  diflEiculty  consent- 
ed to  his  appointment.  As  Tompkins  was  a  candidate  for 
the  presidency,  and  knew  that  Gen.  Porter  would  be  an 
influential  member  of  the  next  congress,  he  probably  felt 
desirous  to  afford  him  this  evidence  of  his  courtesy.  Col. 
Jenkins,  the  late  secretary,  who,  it  is  presumed,  was  a 
candidate  possessing  what  is  called  claims,  was  the  devo- 
ted friend  of  Judge  Spencer,  who  made  no  secret  of  his 
opposition  to  the  governor's  pretensions  to  the  presiden- 
tial office.  By  proposing  so  respectable  a  name  as  Gen. 
Porter's,  Gov.  Tompkins  without  an  open  controversy 
with  Spencer  or  Jenkins  disposed  of  the  claims  of  the  lat- 
ter, who  was  fain  to  acquiesce  in  the  miserable  scheme 
to  which  Gov.  Tompkins  and  the  council  consented,  of  re- 
moving the  venerable  Philip  Van  Rensselaer,  brother  of 
the  Patroon,  from  the  mayoralty  of  Albany,  and  of  receiv- 
ing the  appointment  in  lieu  of  that  of  Secretary  of  State. 
There  was  one  question  which  somewhat  embarrassed 
the  council,  and  produced  considerable  public  excitement  j 
and  this  was  the  appointment  of  a  mayor  of  New- York. 
De  Witt  Clinton  was  the  incumbent.  He  had  discharged 
the  duties  of  the  office  ably  and  faithfully.  Whether  pes- 
tilence* or  war  prevailed,  he  was  constantly  at  his  post. 
The  Tammany  party  in  New-York,  which  then  really  con- 
stituted the  republican  party  of  that  city  pressed  his  re- 

•  The  yellow  fever  prevailed  twice  in  New-York,  while  Mr.  Clinton  was  mayor. 


ISl5.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  397 

moval.  Judge  Spencer  was  indefatigable  in  his  exertions 
to  effect  the  same  object,  and  of  course  Mr.  Stranahan 
was  for  it,  and  so  was  Mr.  Dayton,  who  came  from  the 
hotbed  of  Martlingism.  Mr.  Hubbard  was  at  the  last 
presidential  election  a  zealous  Clintonian,  and  went  on  a 
mission  to  Vermont  with  a  view  to  obtain  the  vote  of  that 
state  for  his  favorite  candidate.  He  was  still  friendly  to 
Mr.  Clinton,  and  desired  his  re-appointment,  Mr.  El- 
mendorfF,  if  influenced  by  any  individual,  was  probably 
more  guided  by  Mr.  Van  Buren  than  any  other.  Van 
Buren  did  not  desire  to  take  an  active  part  on  either  side  of 
this  question,  and  Mr.  Elmendorff,  for  that  or  some  other 
reason,  for  some  time,  hesitated  about  committing  him- 
self on  the  question.*  Tompkins  dreaded  giving  the 
casting  vote.  He  did  not  wish  to  offend  the  republican 
friends  of  Mr.  Clinton,  and  he  dared  not  encounter  the 
resentment  of  the  New-York  Tammanies.  For  these  rea- 
sons the  appointment  of  mayor  of  New-York  was  for  a 
considerable  time  delayed. 

During  the  year  1814,  a  writer  of  considerable  talents 
had  appeared  in  a  New-York  paper,  assuming  the  name  of 
Ahimaleck  Coody^  a  mechanic  of  that  place.  The  writer 
was  a  federalist,  and  addressed  himself  principally  to  the 
party  to  which  he  belonged.  He  endeavored  to  show  the 
impropriety  of  opposing  the  war,  and  urged  them  to  come 
forward  manfully  in  defence  of  their  country.  He  also, 
as  I  am  told,  for  I  have  not  for  many  years  seen  his  num- 
bers, attacked  De  Wilt  Clinton  with  great  severity.  This 
was  a  sure  passport  to  the  favors  of  St.  Tammany.  It 
was  soon  ascertained  that  this  writer  was  Mr.  Gulian  C. 
Verplanck,  a  gentleman  who  has  since  distinguished  him- 
self for  his  talents  and  usefulness,  both  in  the  national 
and  state  legislature.  He  also  holds  a  high  rank  as  a  man 
of  respectable    literary  attainments.      Abimaleck   Coody 

*  I  state  this  from  report.    It  may  be  incorrect. 


398  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1815. 

was  answered  by  a  writer  under  the  signature  of  "  A  Tra- 
veller," with  great  point  and  severity.  This  was  said  to 
be  the  production  of  Mr.  Clinton.  He  charges  Mr.  Ver- 
planck's  hostility  to  Clinton,  as  having  grown  out  of  a 
charge  given  by  Mr.  C.  while  mayor  of  New- York,  on  an 
occasion  when  Verplanck  was  indicted  for  a  riot  in 
Columbia  College,  and  the  "  Traveller's"  main  object  seems 
to  have  been  to  ridicule  Mr.  Verplanck's  claim  to  literary 
merit;  but  towards  the  conclusion,  he  says  that,  "He" 
(Coody,  alias  Verplanck,)  "  has  become  the  head  of  a 
political  sect  called  the  Coodies,  of  hybrid  nature,  com- 
posed of  the  combined  spawn  of  federalism  and  Jacobin- 
ism, and  generated  in  the  venomous  passions  of  disappoint- 
ment and  revenge,  without  any  definite  character;  neither 
fish  nor  flesh,  nor  bird  nor  beast,  but  a  nondescript  made 
up  of 

"All  monstrous,  all  prodigious  things." 

Mr.  Verplanck  was  joined  by  several  others,  few  it  is 
true,  in  number,  but  highly  respectable  for  talents  and 
standing,  among  whom  were  Judge  RadclifF,  who  had  been 
appointed  mayor  by  the  federalists  in  1810;  and  Mr. 
Maxwell,  since  district  attorney  of  New- York.  This  lit- 
tle party  were  taken  into  very  close  communion  by  Judge 
Spencer,  and  he  was  understood  to  be  in  favor  of  Judge 
Radcliff  for  mayor.  It  is  not  improbable  that  this  good 
understanding  commenced  when  Peter  W.  Radcliflf  was 
in  the  council  of  1813.  It  really  does  seem  that  that  lit- 
tle association  was,  in  a  great  degree,  governed  by  hostili- 
ty to  De  Witt  Clinton,  for  there  were  scarcely  enough  of 
them  to  occupy  the  places  which  would  be  rendered  va- 
cant by  the  expulsion  of  the  Clintonian  office  holders  in  the 
city;  and  it  does  not  appear  that  they  ever  acted  with 
the  republican  p.rty  from  that  time  to  the  present,  except 
when  it  was  necessary  to  do  so  in  order  personally  to  op- 
pose De  Witt  Clinton.     The  result  of  the  next  election, 


1815.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  399 

(April,  1815,)  proved  that  they  made  no  impression  on  the 
federal  party  in  New-York,  for  from  being  democratic  in 
1814,  the  city  changed  to  federalism  in  1815.  The  Goodies, 
in  common  with  all  the  other  opponents  of  Mr.  Clinton, 
pressed  his  removal,  and  they  insisted  on  the  appointment 
of  Judge  RadclifF.  The  Tammany  society  seemed  to  pre- 
fer the  appointment  of  their  Grand  Sachem,  Mr.  John  Fer- 
guson. In  the  end,  Mr.  ElmendorfF  was  induced  to  give 
up  his  scruples  about  removing  Mr.  Clinton;  and  an  ar- 
rangement was  made,  by  which  Mr.  Ferguson  was  ap- 
pointed mayor,  under  an  understanding  that  he  was  soon 
to  be  provided  with  an  office  by  the  general  government, 
(surveyor  of  the  port,)  when  Mr.  RadclifF  was  to  receive 
the  office  of  mayor.  Mr.  Clinton  was  displaced,  and  the 
above  arrangement  was  fully  carried  into  eifect.* 

The  situation  of  Mr.  Clinton  was  now  deplorable,  and 
his  prospects  were  painfully  gloomy.  To  all  appearance 
his  political  expectations  were  entirely  blasted.     He  was 

*  I  cannot  conclude  my  remarks  on  this  council  without  mentioning  one  of  their 
acts  which  was  peculiarly  reprehensible.  Mr.  Ruggles  Hubbard,  who,  it  will  be 
recollected,  was  a  senator  from  the  eastern  district,  was  a  lawyer  residing  in  Rens- 
selaer county.  He  was  irregular  in  his  habits,  la.x  in  his  moral  principles,  and  im- 
provident in  his  expenditures.  This  man,  in  preference  to  many  other  worthy  and 
respectable  old  citizens  of  New- York,  was  appointed  sherifTof  the  city  and  coun- 
ty of  New-York.  An  office  worth  ten  thousand  dollars  a  year,  which  eminently 
required  a  man  intimately  acquainted  with  the  citizens  and  their  circumstances, 
and  one  not  only  responsible  in  a  pecuniary  point  of  view,  but  of  correct  busi- 
ness habits,  and  punctilious  in  all  his  dealings,  was  given  by  the  council  to  a 
member  of  their  own  body,  of  irregular  habits,  insolvent  in  his  circumstances, 
and  a  stranger  to  the  city.  It  was  a  mere  exertion  of  arbitrary  power,  an  insult 
and  outrage  on  the  city  of  New-York,  which  ought  to  have  disgraced  the  most 
despotic  tyrant  in  the  eastern  world.  How  the  city  of  New-York  could  have  been 
Induced  to  submit  peaceably  to  this  most  inexcusable  act,  is  a  miracle.  That  Mr 
Hubbard  was  wholly  unworthy  of  this  office,  even  had  he  been  a  citizen  of  New- 
York,  apiiears  from  the  ridiculous  attempt,  subsequently  made  by  him  to  get  pos- 
session of  Amelia  Island,  and  his  miserable  death  there. 

It  is  due  to  Ruggles  Hubbard  to  say,  that  although  he  was  lax  in  his  moral  prin- 
ciples and  reckless  in  his  habits,  he  was  an  exceedingly  pleasant  companionable 
man,  good  natured  and  kind  in  his  disposition,  and  humane  and  generous  to  a 
fault.  He  left  many  worthy  and  respectable  connexions  in  the  part  of  the  state 
■where  he  resided.  His  fellow  members  of  the  council  deserve,  I  was  going  to  say, 
more  of  the  maledictions  of  the  public  than  ought  to  be  bestowed  upon  him. 


400  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1815. 

no  longer  in  fellowship  with  the  republican'party.  There 
was  no  reasonable  ground  to  believe  that  the  federalists 
would  regain  an  ascendency  either  in  the  state  or  nation, 
and  if  they  should,  there  was  little  probability  that  they 
would  betow  on  him  any  marks  of  distinction  or  favor. 
From  youth  up  he  had  devoted  himself  to  politics,  and 
had  never  followed  any  business  or  profession.  He  had 
a  large  family  dependent  on  him  for  education  and  sup- 
port, and  although  he  was  neither  a  speculator  nor  pro- 
fuse in  his  expenses,  by  reason  of  responsibilities  he  had 
improvidently  assumed  for  others,  and  a  want  of  system 
in  his  domestic  economy,  he  was  insolvent  for  many  thou- 
sands of  dollars.  But  he  was  a  man  of  great  firmness 
and  moral  courage.  He  did  not  abandon  himself  to  des- 
pondency, nor  did  he  yield  to  childish  resentment.  He 
continued  his  social  intercourse,  and  maintained  his  digni- 
ty of  deportment.  He  betook  himself  to  literary  pursuits, 
and  soon  distinguished  himself  by  his  dissertations  and 
addresses,  as  a  man  of  science  and  considerable  literary 
attainments;  and  he  pursued  with  ardor  his  scheme  of  in- 
ducing the  state  to  open  a  communication  by  a  canal  be- 
tween the  great  lakes  and  the  tide  waters  of  the  Hudson. 

Mr.  Clinton  was  descended  from  the  Irish.  From  that 
and  other  circumstances,  he  was  during  his  whole  life,  the 
favorite  of  the  great  mass  of  Irish  adopted  citizens.  Af- 
ter his  removal  from  the  mayoralty,  he  was  addressed  by 
Thomas  Addis  Emmett  and  Doct.  McNivin,  in  behalf  of 
the  Irish  citizens  in  a  manner  creditable  to  them,  and 
honorable  to  him.  '*We  prefer,"  say  they,  "  the  mo- 
ment of  your  retreat  from  office,  for  the  expression  of 
our  deep  sense  of  your  manifold  and  important  services  to 
the  public." 

Mr.  Clinton's  reply  gives  stronger  evidence  of  intense 
feelings  than  any  of  his  productions. 


1815.J  OF   NEW-YOKK.  401 

Little  business  of  interest  was  transacted  in  the  legis- 
lature during  the  remaining  part  of  this  session. 

Gerrit  L.  Dox  was  chosen  treasurer  in  lieu  of  Mr.  Piatt. 

The  result  of  the  election  in  April  was  somewhat  different 
from  that  which  was  expected  probably  by  either  party. 
The  city  of  New-York  elected  federal  members  to  the  as- 
sembly. Of  the  one  hundred  and  twenty-six  which  com- 
posed that  house,  according  to  the  certificate  of  the  re- 
turning officers,  sixty-three  were  federalists  and  sixty- 
three  republicans. 

In  the  senate,  Jacob  Barker  was  elected  from  the  south- 
ern district^  Peter  R.  Livingston  and  Isaac  Ogden  from  the 
middle,  Abraham  Van  Vechten,  David  Allen,  Henry  I. 
Frey  and  Ralph  Hascal  from  the  eastern;  and  Henry 
Seymour  and  Stephen  Bates  from  the  western  dictrict.  All 
the  districts  were  democratic  except  the  eastern. 


£6 


402  POLITICAL    HISTOKY  [1815. 

CHAPTER   XXI. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1815,  TO  MAY  1,  1816. 

The  peace,  as  I  have  before  in  substance  stated,  entirely 
prostrated  the  hopes  of  the  federalists,  as  a  party;  and  I 
am  not  aware  that,  either  in  this  or  any  other  state  in  the 
union,  saving  a  feeble  effort  made  in  the  spring  of  1816, 
in  New-York,  to  elect  Mr.  King  for  governor,  they  have 
made  any  serious  effort,  under  the  name  of  federalists, 
since  the  termination  of  the  war. 

The  issue  which  was  made  between  the  republican  and 
federal  parties,  on  the  war  question,  was  unfortunate,  and, 
on  the  part  of  the  federalists,  ill  judged  and  impolitic.  I 
say  ill  judged  and  impolitic,  because,  I  trust,  all  candid, 
fair  minded  republicans  will  admit  that  the  great  mass  of 
the  federalists  were  sincerely  attached  to  the  civil  institu- 
tions and  independence  of  the  country;  that  they  honestly 
believed  the  war  was  unadvisedly  declared  and  badly  con- 
ducted; and  that  the  administration  of  Mr.  Madison  was 
weak  and  inefficient,  and  tended  to  produce,  and  was  pro- 
ducing, serious  injuries  to  the  nation.  It  seems  to  me 
then,  that  after  the  constitutional  authorities  of  the  coun- 
try had  declared  war,  althougn  the  federalists  may  have 
supposed  that  war  to  have  been  injudiciously  and  prema- 
turely declared,  and  even  although  they  might  have  be- 
lieved that  by  a  proper  course  of  negotiation,  on  the  part 
of  the  American  government,  it  might  have  been  avoided, 
yet,  inasmuch  as  a  state  of  war  with  a  powerful  nation 
actually  existed,  they  ought  by  their  influence,  in  and  out 
of  the  legislative  halls,  to  have  exerted  themselves  in  fa- 
vor of  the  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war,  and  they 
should  have  manifested  their  wish  that  the  government 


1815.]  OF   NEw-iroRK.  403 

might  be  furnished  with  the  necessary  means  of  men  and 
of  money,  to  bring  that  war  to  a  termination  upon  princi- 
ples advantageous  and  honorable  to  the  nation. 

The  conduct  of  the  federalists  was,  in  many  respects, 
the  reverse  of  this.  From  the  question,  whether  the  war 
was  well  or  ill  conducted  by  the  government,  or  whether 
it  was  prematurely  declared,  they  allowed  themselves  to 
be  drawn  into  a  controversy  respecting  the  cause  of  the 
war,  and  whether  the  American  government  were  not 
equally  culpable  with  the  British.  In  their  zeal  to  con- 
demn our  own  administration,  they  were  led,  first  to  apolo- 
gize for,  and  finally  to  justify,  the  conduct  of  the  common 
enemy.  As  the  federalists  affirmed  that  the  war  was  pre- 
maturely declared,  and  that  the  administration  was  incom- 
petent to  conduct  it,  any  ill  success  in  prosecuting  it  they 
seemed  to  suppose,  would  be  proof  of  the  truth  of  their 
allegations.  Hence,  sometimes  the  federal  press  exulted, 
or  rather  manifested  symptoms  of  gratification  at  the 
news  of  a  defeat  of  the  American  troops.  At  the  public 
meetings  of  the  federalists,  and  indeed  in  their  social  in 
tercourse,  on  like  occasions,  they  gave  similar  indications. 
The  true  cause  of  such  exultation  and  joy  was,  not  that 
the  British  arms  were  successful,  but  that  the  administra- 
tion, by  means  of  the  disaster,  was  disgraced.  But  the 
opponents  of  the  federalists  were  able  to  produce  an  im 
pression  among  the  people  that  it  was  not  the  hostility  of 
the  federalists  to  the  administration,  but  their  partiality  to 
a  foreign  government,  which  induced  them  to  apologize 
for,  and  sometimes  justify,  the  British.  The  conduct  of 
over  zealous  federalists  tended  to  give  color  and  sustain 
the  allegations  of  their  opponents. 

It  has  always  seemed  to  me,  that  if  the  federalists  had, 
in  good  faith,  supported  war  measures,  and  confined  their 
opposition  to  the  reckless  expenditure  of  the  public  mo- 
ney, and  the  manner  in  which  the  war  was  conducted, 


401  POLITICAL   HISTORY  [1&15. 

they  would  have  carried  the  hearts  of  a  majority  of  the 
American  people  with  them,  and  broken  down  the  admin- 
istration. 

It  cannot  fail  to  be  unfortunate  for  parties,  in  a  repub- 
lic, to  be  founded  on  a  difference  of  opinion  as  regards 
the  merits  or  demerits  of  a  foreign  power;  and  the  fate  of 
the  federalists,  as  a  party,  which  seems  to  have  been  in- 
duced by  appearing  to  take  the  side  of  a  foreign  govern- 
ment, will,  in  that  respect,  it  is  hoped,  have  a  salutary  ef- 
fect on  all  parties  hereafter.  And  it  is  worthy  of  remark, 
that  although,  since  the  peace  with  England,  our  govern- 
ment has  had  serious  difficulties  with  other  nations,  and 
we  have  constantly  had  highly  excited  parties  in  our 
midst,  no  party  has  taken  the  side  of  any  of  the  foreign 
governments  with  whom  we  have  differed.  Indeed,  I 
have  sometimes  apprehended,  that  our  party  leaders  are 
too  much  afraid  of  the  charge  of  foreign  influence  or  for- 
eign partialities. 

The  American  government  may  err  in  its  treatment  of 
another  government,  and  when  you  become  sensible  that 
it  does  so  it  is  your  right  as  a  freeman,  and  you  are  bound 
as  an  honest  man,  to  condemn  the  course  pursued  by  your 
own  governmentj  not  with  a  view  to  aid  a  foreign  power, 
but  for  the  purpose  of  reforming  your  own  government. 
The  federalists  being  in  this  hopeless  condition,  as  a 
party,  felt  very  indifferent  about  the  presidential  candi- 
dates. It  is,  however,  natural  to  suppose,  that  they  hoped 
the  republican  party  would  divide  on  that  question.  The 
president  had  then  been  taken  from  the  state  of  Virginia 
for  twenty-four  out  of  the  twenty-eight  years  during 
which  the  United  States  government  had  existed.  This 
apparent  partiality  for  the  citizens  of  that  state,  had  been 
long  severely  denounced  by  the  federalists  of  the  northern 
and  middle  states,  and  it  had  recently  been  harped  upon 
by  the  papers,  claiming  to  be  republican,  which  supported 


1815.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  405 

Mr.  Clinton.  It  was  now  the  interest  of  Gov.  Tompkins, 
and  other  competitors  with  Mr.  Monroe  for  the  presidency, 
to  countenance  and  give  effect,  among  the  republicans,  to 
the  prejudices  which  had  been  excited  against  what  was 
called  the  Virginia  dynasty.  Judge  Spencer  and  Gen. 
Armstrong  were  in  favor  of  Mr.  Crawford,  but  the  great 
mass  of  the  republican  party  in  the  state  were  for  Gov. 
Tompkins. 

Immediately  after  the  peace  was  concluded,  Mr.  Madi- 
son began  to  give  tokens  that  Mr.  Monroe  was  to  be  the 
executive  candidate.  Whether  an  understanding  existed 
at  the  time  of  the  election  of  Mr.  Madison,  that  Mr.  Mon- 
roe, who  at  first  exhibited  some  symptoms  of  oppugnation, 
should  be  his  successor,  or  whether  he  was  operated  upon 
by  the  pressure  of  his  Virginia  friends;  or  from  personal 
friendship,  and  from  an  opinion  that  Mr.  Monroe  was 
really  the  fittest  and  most  suitable  man,  or,  whatever  the 
cause  may  have  been,  it  is  certain  that  when  danger  from 
a  foreign  enemy  and  domestic  disturbance  disappeared, 
Mr.  Madison,  contrary  to  his  intentions  when  he  tendered 
to  Mr.  Tompkins  the  office  of  secretary  of  state,  did  aban- 
don his  claims,  and  sustain    those  of  Mr.  Monroe. 

As  soon  as  it  was  known  in  New-York  that  Mr.  Mon- 
roe was  the  executive  candidate  for  the  succession,  a  small 
party  was  got  up  who  favored  his  pretensions,  and  among 
them  were  men  who  had  been  the  confidential  friends  of 
Gov.  Tompkins,  and  had  participated  largely  in  the  boun- 
ties he  had  distributed. 

There  are  good  reasons  to  believe  that  the  national  ad- 
ministration, under  the  control  of  the  Virginia  dynasty, 
had,  for  a  long  time,  entertained  some  jealousy  of  the 
leading  and  most  influencial  republicans  in  the  state  of 
New-York.  The  great  and  rapidly  increasing  numerical 
weight  of  this  state  might  have  increased  that  jealousy. 
Hence,  the  policy  at  Washington  was  to  prevent  any  one 


406  POLITICAL    HISTO&Y  [1815. 

man  from  getting,  or  rather  from  retaining,  an  ascendancy 
with  the  republican  party  in  the  state.  Hence,  we  find 
that  the  minor  section  of  that  party  were  always  the  spe- 
cial favorites  of  the  administration,  from  the  time  of  the 
existence  of  the  Burr  faction  down  to  the  period  of  which 
I  am  writing.  Accordingly,  William  P.  Van  Ness,  the 
second  of  Burr  in  the  duel  with  Hamilton,  the  avowed 
author  of  Aristides,  and  the  uncompromising  enemy  of 
De  Witt  Clinton,  was  made  a  judge  of  the  United  States 
court.  Hence,  also,  the  early  attacks  upon  that  gentle- 
man, in  the  Richmond  Enquirer,  and,  in  1808,  when  Mr. 
Clinton  was  supporting  the  embargo  and  other  measures 
of  the  general  government,  in  the  senate  of  New-York, 
the  attacks  upon  him  by  the  Washington  Monitor,  a  paper 
edited  by  Mr.  Colvin,  a  clerk  in  the  office  of  Mr.  Madison, 
and  other  republican  papers  directly  under  his  controlj 
and  hence,  the  Martling  men  and  Lewisites  in  New- York, 
after  they  denounced  Mr.  Clinton,  and  while  they  were, 
as  respected  the  great  republican  party  in  the  state,  liter- 
ally a  faction,  were  the  peculiar  favorites  of  the  adminis- 
tration, and  the  special  objects  of  its  bounty.  This  policy 
of  the  general  government  had  been  sanctioned  and  se- 
cretly encouraged  by  governor  Tompkins,  but  it  was  now 
his  turn  to  encounter  the  same  policy  exerted  towards 
himself. 

In  illustration  of  this  remark  it  is  my  duty  to  state,  that 
Solomon  Southwick,  who  had  for  years  abused  the  national 
administration  and  the  Virginia  dynasty;  who  had  boiste- 
rously opposed,  in  1812,  the  election  of  Mr.  Madison; 
and  who  had  most  bitterly  attacked  Gov.  Tompkins,  Judge 
Spencer,  and  other  distinguished  republicans  of  New- 
York,  was  now  a  successful  applicant  for  an  appointment 
by  the  general  government. 

It  is  true,  that  after  the  news  of  peace,  in  the  winter  of 
1815,  he  came  out,  in  the  Albany  Register,  in  favor  of  the 


1815.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  407 

republican  party,  and  of  the  conduct  of  Mr.  Tompkins,  as 
governor;  but  those  who  recollected  his  severe  and  con- 
tinued animadversions  in  that  paper,  for  three  years  prece- 
dmg,  found  it  extremely  difficult  to  accord  implicit  credit 
to  his  sincerity. 

The  office  of  post-master,  at  Albany,  had  become  va- 
cant by  the  death  of  Peter  P.  Dox,  in  the  fall  of  1815, 
and  Mr,  Southwick  was  an  applicant  for  that  appointment. 
It  is  true  he  was  recommended  by  a  respectable  meeting, 
principally  of  republicans,  in  Albany,  at  which  George 
Merchant  was  chairman,  and  Charles  E.  Dudley  secretary^ 
but  it  was  well  understood  that  the  meeting  was  got  up 
principally  through  the  influence  of  the  creditors  of  Mr. 
Southwick,  in  the  hope,  if  he  should  be  appointed  to  a 
lucrative  office,  that  peradventure  they  might  realize  a 
portion,  or  the  whole,  of  the  debts  he  owed  them, 

Mr.  Southwick  was  in  favor  of  Mr.  Monroe  for  presi- 
dent, and  he  was  eventually  appointed  post-master  at  Al- 
bany. 

At  this  time  the  selection  of  the  presidential  candidate 
was  made  by  a  caucus  of  republican  members  of  congress. 
This  was  then  the  common  law  of  the  democratic  party. 
The  fourteenth  congress  convened  on  the  first  Monday  in 
December.  As  I  happened  to  be  a  member  of  that  con- 
gress I  can  speak  with  some  confidence  in  relation  to  the 
manoeuvrings  which  occurred,  prior  to  the  congressional 
caucus.  When  the  members  from  this  state  arrived  in 
Washington,  it  was  found  that  nearly,  if  not  quite,  all  the 
republicans,  (and  they  were  the  only  persons  who  claimed 
the  right  to  interfpre  in  the  selection  of  a  presidential  can- 
didate,) were  for  Gov.  Tompkins,  if  it  should  be  found 
that  there  was  a  reasonable  prospect  of  procuring  his 
nomination;  but  it  was  soon  ascertained  that  it  could  not 
be  effected.  The  New-England  states  were  all  represented 
by  federalists,  with   the   exception   of  three   republican 


408  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1815. 

members  from  that  part  of  Massachusetts  which  now  con- 
stitutes the  state  of  Maine.  The  majority  of  the  republi- 
can members  were  from  the  south,  and  these  were  all  op- 
posed to  the  nomination  of  Tompkins.  Their  ostensible 
objection  was,  that  he  had  never  been  in  the  service  of  the 
nation,  and  therefore,  their  constituents  knew  little  or 
nothing  of  him.  It  was  in  vain  that  w^e  urged  his  merits 
as  governor  of  New-York,  during  the  late  war.*  "  I  have 
no  doubt,"  said  a  member  from  North  Carolina  to  me, 
*'  that  Mr.  Tompkins  is  a  good  governor.  We,  also,  have 
a  good  governor  in  North  Carolina,  but  we  do  not,  on  that 
account,  expect  you  to  support  him  for  the  office  of  presi- 
dent." It  was  difficult  to  answer  this  objection,  although 
the  only  reason  vs^hy  Gov.  Tompkins  had  not  been  in  the 
service  of  the  nation,  was  his  refusal  to  accept  the  office 
of  secretary  of  state,  solely  for  the  reason  that  he  could 
render  more  service  to  the  nation  as  governor  than  he 
could  as  secretary  of  state. 

I  regret  to  say,  that  those  who  manifested  an  inclination 
to  support,  in  caucus.  Gov.  Tompkins,  may  be  designated 
by  geographical  lines.  His  friends  were  to  be  found  in 
New-York,  New-Jersey,  some  in  Pennsylvania,  some  in 
Kentucky,  some  in  Ohio,  and  some  in  Maryland;  but  not 
a  single  supporter  of  Tompkins  could  be  found  south  of 
the  Potomac.  What  was,  w^hat  is,  notwithstanding  what 
has  lately  taken  place,  the  inference  to  be  drawn,  by  the 
northern  aspirants  to  the  national  executive  chair,  from 
this  fact  1  Of  those  republican  members  from  Massachu- 
setts, two  were  for  Mr.  Monroe,  and  one,  (Col.  Conner,  a 
talented  and  enterprising  man,  who,  although  elected  from 
Maine,  was  an  actual  resident  of  Albany,  he  having  mar- 
ried the  daughter  of  Isaac  Denniston,  Esq.,)  was  for 
Tompkins.  It  soon  became  evident  that  Tompkins  could 
not  be  nominated;  but,  before  this  was  ascertained,  at  any 
rate  by  those  of  us  who  were  strangers,  a  meeting  was  held 

•  Mr.  Lewis  Williams. 


1815.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  409 

by  the  New- York  delegation,  to  ascertain  each  others' 
views  and  to  endeavor  to  agree  on  ulterior  measures. 

My  object,  and,  I  believe,  the  object  of  a  majority  of 
the  delegates,  was,  in  case  we  should  become  satisfied  that 
the  project  of  nominating  Gov.  Tompkins  was  hopeless, 
then  to  endeavor  to  procure  as  nearly  an  united  vote  of 
the  state  as  possible,  for  William  H,  Crawford,  at  that 
time  secretary  of  war. 

The  old  members,  as  for  instance.  Gen.  Porter,  John 
W.  Taylor,  and  Mr.  Irving  of  New-York,  were  extremely 
wary  and  cautious.  It  was  soon  ascertained  that  few  of 
us  had  hopes  of  succeeding  with  Tompkins,  and  Gen. 
Porter  made  some  suggestions  respecting  the  chance  of 
success  by  holding  him  up  as  a  candidate  in  opposition  to 
the  caucus  nomination;  and,  although  neither  he  nor  any 
one  else  entertained  any  serious  view  of  taking  such  a 
course,  he  appeared  desirous  to  direct  the  attention  of  the 
delegates  from  the  true  question,  which  was,  in  case 
Tompkins  was  given  up,  between  Crawford  and  Monroe. 
Some  one  finally  observed,  that  the  latter  was  the  impor- 
tant, and  in  reality,  the  only  question  to  be  decided.  The 
meeting  was,  notwithstanding,  as  appeared  to  me,  much 
by  means  of  the  influence  of  Gen.  Porter,  John  W.  Tay- 
lor and  Enos  T.  Throop,  broken  up  without  any  expres- 
sion of  opinion  as  between  Monroe  and  Crawford.  I 
knew,  and  those  gentlemen  at  the  time  knew,  that  more 
than  four  to  one  of  the  delegates  were  for  Crawford.  Mr. 
Porter,  although  the  fact  was  not  then  generally  known, 
was  in  favor  of  Monroe,  and  he  was  unwilling  it  should 
be  at  that  juncture  publicly  known  how  large  a  majority 
of  the  New-York  delegation  was  for  Crawford,  being  ap- 
prehensive of  its  effects  en  the  members  of  congress  from 
other  states.  Gen.  Porter  was,  not  long  after,  appointed 
commissicner,  under  the  British  treaty,  to  run  the  boLn- 


410  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1815. 

dary  line  between  the  United  States  and  the  province  of 
Canada. 

William  H.  Crawford  was  a  self-made  man.  He  was  a 
native  of  Virginia,  and,  by  his  parentage,  belonged  rather 
to  a  plebian  than  an  aristocratic  stock.  In  early  life  he 
emigrated  to  Georgia,  where  he  soon  distinguished  himself 
in  the  practice  of  his  profession,  which  was  that  of  the 
law.  He  rose  rapidly  in  the  estimation  of  the  citizens  of 
his  adopted  state,  and  very  soon  was  elected  one  of  the 
representatives  of  that  state,  in  the  senate  of  the  United 
States.  He  was  chosen  as  a  supporter  of  the  national  ad- 
ministration, but,  during  the  years  1811,  and  part  of  1812, 
he  became  dissatisfied  with  what  he  deemed  the  indecisive 
course  of  Mr.  Madison,  with  respect  to  the  difficulties  be- 
tween this  country  and  Great  Britain.  It  has  been  said, 
and  probably  with  truth,  that  Mr.  Madison  was  at  all 
times  averse  to  a  war  with  the  British,  and  that  he  was 
ultimately  forced,  by  the  importunity  of  his  friends  and 
the  almost  unanimous  expression  of  the  opinion  of  his 
party,  to  recommend  a  declaration  of  war.  But,  be  that 
as  it  may,  his  messages  were  certainly  of  an  equivocal 
character,  and  so  drawn  as  to  bear  different  constructions. 
Mr.  Crawford,  in  a  speech  in  the  senate,  complained  of 
this.  He  said,  "  The  messages  are  like  the  responses  of 
the  Delphic  oracle,"  (I  quote  from  memory,)  "  if  you 
are  for  war  the  messages  are  for  war,  if  you  are  for 
peace  they  are  peace  messages."  Mr.  Crawford,  how- 
ever, was  soon  after  removed  from  the  senate,  by  an 
appointment  as  American  minister  at  Paris.  It  was  said 
that  one  reason  why  Mr.  Madison  selected  Mr.  Crawford, 
was,  that  he  apprehended  opposition  from  him,  and  he 
was  very  desirous,  at  that  crisis,  to  prevent  any  division 
amons:  his  southern  democratic  friends.  Mr.  Crawford 
acquitted  himself  creditably  at  the  court  of  France,  and, 
in  1815,  was  recalled  to  preside  over  the  war  department. 


1815.]  OF     NEW- YORK.  411 

He  was  possessed  of  a  vigorous  intellect,  strictly  honest 
and  honorable  in  his  political  conduct,  sternly  indepen- 
dent, and  of  great  decision  of  character.  On  the  other 
hand,  Mr.  Monroe,  though  he  had  been  long  in  public 
life,  a  considerable  part  of  which  consisted  in  the  execu- 
tion of  diplomatic  agencies,  was,  speaking  of  him  as  a 
candidate  for  the  presidency,  not  distinguished  for  vigor 
of  intellect,  or  for  decision  of  character,  independence  of 
action,  or  indeed,  for  any  extraordinary  public  services. 
He  made  no  pretensions  to  distinction  as  a  writer,  or  elo- 
quence as  a  public  speaker.  He  seems  to  have  owed  his 
success  in  life  to  great  caution,  prudence,  and  deliberation 
in  every  thing  which  he  said  or  did. 

With  these  views  of  the  merits  of  Mr.  Monroe  and  Mr. 
Crawford,  in  connection  with  the  fact  that  the  chief  ma- 
gistracy of  the  nation  had  been  so  long  held  by  citizens  of 
Virginia,  and  considering  Gov.  Tompkins  out  of  the 
question,  a  large  majority  of  the  New-York  delegation 
was  rather  ardent  in  support  of  Mr.  Crawford.  Gov. 
Tompkins  thought  unkindly  of  their  course.  He  thought 
they  had  too  readily  consented  to  give  him  up,  although 
it  was  well  known  that  Judge  Spencer,  whose  opinion  at 
that  time  had  great  influence  with  the  members,  decidedly 
preferred  Crawford  to  Tompkins;  yet,  had  there  been  the 
least  prospect  of  his  nommation,  I  have  no  doubt  they 
would,  in  good  faith,  have  supported  him  to  the  last. 
Mr.  Clinton  was  for  Mr.  Monroe.  This  fact  I  know  : — 
Mr.  Van  Buren  took  no  decided  part  in  the  matter.*     In 


•  Mr.  Van  Buren  was  at  Washington  in  the  early  part  of  the  session  of  con- 
gress. I  asked  him  whom  we  ought  to  support  for  president  ?  He  replied,  with  ap- 
parent indifference,  "  We  say  Tompkins,  of  course,"  and  then  turned  the  conver- 
sation to  some  other  subject.  This  conversation  took  place  in  presence  of  James 
Birdsal,  a  member  from  Chenango  county,  who,  after  Mr.  V.  B.  withdrew,  re- 
marked upon  his  coldness  of  manner. 

After  the  New-York  legislature  had  been  for  some  time  in  session,  in  (he  winter 
of  1816,  (February  14,)  a  legislative  caucus  was  held,  at  which  it  was  resolved, 
that  the  democratic  members  of  congress  from  the  state  of  New-York  be  instructed 


412  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1816. 

connection  with  the  New-York  delegation,  the  members 
from  New- Jersey,  part  of  the  Pensylvania  delegation.  Col. 
Conner  fr.om  Massachusetts,  part  of  the  members  from 
Ohio,  Kentucky,  Tennessee  and  North  Carolina,  and  the 
whole  of  the  Georgia  delegation,  were  for  Mr.  Crawford. 
When  congress  first  assembled,  as  between  Crawford  and 
Monroe,  I  have  not  a  particle  of  doubt,  that  a  majority 
of  the  republican  members  were  for  the  former.  But  the 
caucus  was  put  off  from  time  to  time,  until  the  session 
was  considerably  advanced,  and  such  was  the  influence  of 
the  administration  on  its  own  friends,  or  from  other  causes 
unknown  to  me,  when  the  grand  caucus  was  held,  Mr. 
Crawford  received  fifty-four  votes,  and  Mr.  Monroe  sixty- 
five,  who  was  therefore  nominated  for  president.  Gov. 
Tompkins  was  nominated  for  vice-president.  Of  the 
members  from  New-York,  I  believe,  that  Messrs.  Irving, 
Throop  and  Birdseye,  were  the  only  ones  who  voted  for 
Monroe.  Mr.  Taylor  was  believed  to  have  voted  for  him, 
but  he  has  since  told  me  he  did  not.  Gen.  Porter  had 
resigned  his  seat,  having  received  the  appointment  I  have 
mentioned.     Mr.  Clay  was  for  Mr.  Monroe.    [JSToie  £,] 

The  day  appointed  by  law  for  the  meeting  of  the  New- 
York  legislature,was  Tuesday  the  30th  of  January.  On  that 
day  quite  a  sufficient  number  of  the  members  elect  were  in 
Albany,  but  as  several  of  them  did  not  arrive  that  day,  and 
as  there  were  more  federalists  than  republicans  absent,  the 
former  did  not  attend  the  first  day,  and  there  being  no 
quorum,  the  republican  members  who  were  in  attendance, 
adjourned  until  the  day  following.     On  Wednesday,  one 

to  support  Gov.  Tompkins  for  president.  This  resolution  could  hardly  have  been 
passed,  considering  tho  known  zeal  of  Judge  Spencer  for  Mr.  Crawford,  had  not 
Mr.  Van  Buren  earnestly  supported  it.  But,  at  that  late  day,  so  sagacious  a  poli- 
tician as  Mr.  Van  Buren  must  have  perceived  that  if  the  New- York  delegation, 
instead  of  supporting  Crawford,  should  support  Tompkins,  the  nomination  of 
Monroe  would  be  rendered  certain,  and,  of  course,  both  Crawford  and  Tompkins 
would  be  defeated.  If,  at  Albany,  Mr.  Van  Buren  was  ardent  in  the  support  of 
Tompkins,  at  Washington,  to  say  the  least,  he  was  philosphically  calm  and  cool 


1816.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  413 

hundred  and  twenty  members  appeared,  when  Daniel 
Cruger  of  Steuben  county  was  chosen  speaker,  against  J. 
R.  Van  Rensselaer,  by  a  majority  of  one  vote,  and  Aaron 
Clark  was  elected  clerk  by  a  vote  of  sixty-two  to  fifty- 
nine.  There  was  one  blank  vote  cast.  Showing  that 
there  was  then  in  attendance  one  hundred  and  twenty- 
three  members,  for  as  there  was  no  tie  the  speaker  did  not 
vote.  The  seats  of  the  remaining  three  members  were 
vacant  by  reason  of  sickness  or  death. 

Mr.  William  A.  Duer,  a  federal  member  from  Dutchess, 
immediately  on  the  election  of  Speaker,  presented  the  pe- 
tion  of  Henry  Fellows  of  Ontario  county,  claiming  a  right 
to  a  seat  in  the  house  as  a  member  elected  from  Ontario 
county,  in  the  place  of  Peter  Allen,  to  whom  the  petition- 
er alleged  a  certificate  had  been  improperly  granted  by 
the  clerk  of  that  county. 

The  case  contained  in  the  document  presented  by  Mr. 
Duer  was,  as  afterwards  by  the  unanimous  report  of  the 
committee  on  elections,  in  substance  as  follows: — 

Henry  Fellows  was  one  of  the  federal  candidates  for  a 
member  of  the  assembly  from  the  county  of  Ontario,  at 
the  last  annual  election,  and  Peter  Allen  was  the  candi- 
date of  the  republican  party,  at  the  same  election,  and  re- 
ceived a  greater  number  of  votes  than  any  of  the  repub- 
lican candidates.  Among  the  votes  given  to  Mr.  Fellows 
were  forty-nine  votes  from  the  town  of  Pennington,  which 
votes  were  printed  ballots,  with  the  name  of  Henry  Fel- 
lows thereon.  These  votes,  when  added  to  the  residue  of 
the  votes  given  him  in  the  county,  amounted  to  three  thou- 
sand seven  hundred  and  twenty-five.  Mr.  Allen  received 
three  thousand  six  hundred  and  ninety-five  votes  only, 
which  would  have  given  Fellows  a  majority  of  thirty. 
The  inspectors  of  election  for  the  town  of  Pennington 
filed  a  copy  of  their  certificate  of  the  canvass,  with  the 
town  clerk,  and  in  that  certificate  the  name  of  Henry  Fel- 


414  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1861. 

lows  was  written  at  full  length,  but  in  the  duplicate  sent 
by  the  inspectors  to  the  county  clerk,  Mr.  F.'s  name  was 
written  "  Hen.  Fellows."  The  county  clerk  rejected  these 
forty-nine  votes  which  gave  Allen  nineteen  majority,  and 
therefore  he  certified  that  Allen  was  duly  elected.  It  was 
by  virtue  of  a  certificate  given  under  these  circumstances, 
that  Mr.  Allen  claimed  his  seat. 

It  will  be  perceived,  that  as  there  actually  were  but  one 
hundred  and  twenty-three  members,  while  Allen  retained 
his  seat  the  republicans  had  sixty-two  members  and 
the  federalists  sixty-one,  the  moment  Fellows  should 
obtain  the  seat  of  Allen,  then  the  federalists  would  have 
sixty-two  members,  and  the  republicans  including  the 
speaker,  would  have  but  sixty-one.  The  great  strug- 
gle on  the  part  of  the  federalists,  was  to  have  this 
question  decided  before  the  council  of  appointment  was 
chosen,  while  the  republicans  were  anxious  to  put  it  off 
until  they  could  secure  this  spoil  distributing  machine^ 
both  parties  knowing  that  eventually  the  seat  must  be  given 
to  Mr.  Fellows. 

It  is  a  curious  fact,  and  strongly  illustrative  of  the  im- 
portant duty  which  devolves  on  every  elector  at  the  polls, 
that  this  state  of  things  was  produced  by  one  vote  in  the 
the  ballot-box,  given  in  the  county  of  Otsego.  There 
were  two  classes  of  candidates  voted  for  in  that  county  at 
the  preceding  election;  and  out  of  five  members  to  be 
chosen  only  one  federalist  was  elected,  and  that  one  was 
Doct.  William  Campbell,  the  late  surveyor  general.  Upon 
canvassing  the  votes,  it  was  found  that  Doct,  Campbell, 
being  a  popular  as  well  as  a  very  worthy  man,  ran  higher 
than  any  of  the  other  federal  candidates,  and  received  one 
vote  more  than  the  lowest  republican  candidate.  Thus  if 
the  inspectors  of  Pennington,  and  clerk  of  Ontario  coun- 
ty had  done  their  duty,  one  vote  in  the  ballot  box  would 
have  controlled  the  whole  patronage  of  the  great  state  of 


1816.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  415 

New- York  for  the  ensuing  year.  Are  the  important  con- 
sequences which  may  result  from  one  vote  duly  consider- 
ed at  our  popular  elections? — I  fear  not. 

Upon  the  presentation  of  this  petition,  Mr.  John  H. 
Beech  of  Cayuga,  a  republican  member,  moved  that  the 
reading  of  the  petition  and  documents  be  postponed  until 
to-morrow.  Mr.  Duer  objected  that  the  motion  was  not 
in  order.  The  speaker  decided  that  the  motion  was  in 
order.  Mr.  Thomas  J.  Oakley,  another  member  from 
Dutchess,  appealed  from  the  decision  of  the  speaker. 
On  the  decision  of  this  question,  the  ayes  and  noes  were 
called  for,  and  the  clerk  was  proceeding  to  call  the  names 
of  the  members,  when  Mr.  Duer  made  a  motion  that  the 
name  of  Peter  Allen  be  omitted  in  calling  the  roll,  on  the 
ground  that  he  was  collaterally  interested  in  the  question. 
The  speaker  decided  that  this  last  motion  of  Mr.  Duer 
was  not  in  order,  from  which  decision  an  appeal  was 
taken.  The  ayes  and  noes  were  called  on  this  new  ques- 
tion of  order  and  it  was  objected  that  Peter  Allen  had  not 
a  right  to  vote  on  this  question  of  order,  the  speaker  de- 
cided he  had  such  rightj  from  which  last  decision  there 
was  an  appeal.     The  house  then  adjourned. 

It  is  easy  to  perceive,  that  in  this  way  there  could  be  no 
end  to  the  contest,  for  every  time  a  new  question  arose,  an 
appeal  from  the  decision  of  the  speaker  was  taken,  as  to 
the  right  of  Peter  Allen  to  vote,  and  a  new  question 
was  presented  as  to  his  right  to  vote  upon  the  question, 
which  a  moment  before  was  itself  the  new  question. 

On  Thursday  morning  both  parties  seemed  inclined  to 
a  truce,  or  rather  a  suspension  of  hostilities  long  enough 
for  time  to  breathe  a  little.  They  therefore  proceeded 
organize  the  house  by  the  appointment  of  a  doorkeeper, 
sergeant-at-arms,  &c.  and  they  sent  messages  to  the  go- 
vernor and  senate,  informing  them  that  the  house  was  or- 
ganized. The  governor  returned  for  answer,  that  he  would 


416  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1816. 

meet  the  two  houses  at  the  assembly  chamber  on  the  next 
day,  and  then  the  house  adjourned. 

On  Friday,  the  2nd  of  February,  the  governor  deliver- 
ed his  speech,  after  which  the  house  adjourned  until  Sa- 
turday morning. 

On  that  morning  the  contest  was  again  renewed. 

Col.  Leavenworth,  from  Delaware  county,  a  gentleman 
who  distinguished  himself  as  an  officer  in  the  late  war, 
offered  a  resolution,  that  the  "  house  will  immediately 
proceed  to  nominate  and  appoint  a  council  of  appoint- 
ment." 

When  this  resolution  was  offered,  Mr.  Lynch  offered  a 
resolution  that  the  resolution  to  choose  a  council  of  ap 
pointment  be  postponed  until  after  a  decision  of  the 
right  of  Peter  Allen  to  a  seat  in  the  house.  The  speaker 
decided  that  Mr.  Lynch's  motion  was  not  in  order,  and  his 
decision  was  confirmed  by  the  house. 

Mr.  Oakley  then  moved  to  amend  the  resolution  offered 
by  Col.  Leavenworth, by  striking  out  the  word  "  immediate- 
ly" and  inserting  "  on  Wednesday  next,  and  that  in  the 
mean  time  the  house  would  consider  the  right  of  Peter 
Allen  to  his  seat."  On  this  question  the  ayes  and  noes 
were  ordered;  and  thereupon  Mr.  Jay  made  a  motion  that 
Peter  Allen  be  excluded  from  voting  on  the  amendment 
offered  by  Mr.  Oakley.  The  speaker  decided  that  Mr. 
Jay's  motion  was  not  in  order,  and  Mr.  Jay  appealed. 
Before  deciding  the  question  on  this  appeal,  the  house  ad 
journed  till  Monday. 

On  Monday,  which  was  the  sixth  day  of  the  session,  the 
house  met,  and  forthwith  the  contest  was  renewed.  Mr. 
Duer  moved  that  Peter  Allen  should  not  be  allowed  to 
vote  on  the  appeal  of  Mr.  Oakley.  The  speaker  decided 
that  Mr.  D.'s  motion  was  not  in  order,  and  from  that  deci- 
sion he  appealed.  The  ayes  and  noes  being  taken,  the  re- 
sult was  sixty-one  votes  against  the  decision  of  the  speak- 


1816.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  417 

er,  and  sixty-one  votes  including  the  vote  of  Mr.  Allen, 
for  sustaining  it.  The  speaker  of  course  voted  in  favor 
of  his  own  decision,  and  declared  the  appeal  to  be  lost. 

The  question  in  various  forms  was  presented  of  the 
right  of  Peter  Allen  to  vote  on  a  question  affecting  his 
right  to  a  seat,  and  on  his  right  to  vote  on  questions  affect- 
ing his  right  to  vote  on  those  questions,  and  always  ended 
with  the  same  results.  Peter  Allen  did  vote,  and  by  such 
vote  the  house  was  equally  divided,  in  all  which  cases  the 
decision  of  the  question  was  of  course  made  by  the  casting 
vote  of  the  speaker. 

Eventually  the  resolution  of  Col.  Leavenworth,  to  pro- 
ceed immediately  to  the  choice  of  a  council  of  appoint 
ment,  was  adopted  by  the  casting  vote  of  the  speaker. 
The  house  then,  before  any  adjournment,  proceeded  to  elect 
a  council  of  appointment.  The  result  was  as  follows: — 
Darius  Crosby,  sixty-three ;  William  Ross,  sixty-onej 
Parley  Keyes,  sixty-one;  Archibald  S.  Clark,  sixty-twoj. 
Samuel  Verbryck,  forty-sevenj  Abraham  Van  Vechten, 
sixty-one;  Gerrit  Wendell,  sixty-one;  Henry  Seymour, 
sixty-one. 

Two  of  the  four  first  mentioned  gentlemen  were  elected 
(Mr.  Ross  and  Mr.  Keyes,)  by  the  casting  vote  of  the 
speaker,  and  the  vote  of  Peter  Allen. 

On  the  next  day  after  the  council  of  appointment  was 
chosen,  the  committee  of  elections  reported,  on  the  peti- 
tion of  Mr.  Fellows,  the  facts  I  have  stated,  and  unani- 
mously recommended  the  adoption  of  a  resolution  that  Pe- 
ter Allen  was  not  entitled  to  a  seat  in  that  house,  and  that 
such  seat  of  right  belonged  to  Henry  Fellows. 

On  the  question  of  agreeing  to  the  report,  the  ayes 
and  noes  were  called,  and  one  hundred  and  fifteen  mem- 
bers voted  in  the  affirmative,  and  one  only,  (Mr.  Ganson 
of  Genesee)  in  the  negative. 

27 


418  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1816. 

Since  all  interest  in  these  proceedings  have  si.bsidedj  I 
trust  very  few  men  can  be  found  who  will  justify  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  republican  part  of  this  house  of  as- 
sembly. 

As  to  the  right  of  Mr.  Allen  to  a  seat  there  could  not  be 
two  opinions.  It  was  a  palpable  case  of  error  in  the  re- 
turning officer.  The  Clerk  of  Ontario  county  must  have 
been  stupid,  to  a  degree  approaching  to  idiocy,  or  he  must 
have  acted  corruptly  and  fraudulently;  and  this  view  of 
his  conduct  must  have  been  taken  by  every  man  of  common 
sense  in  the  assembly. 

Again,  Allen  had  a  direct  interest  in  retaining  a  seat  in 
the  house,  and  no  member  can  vote  on  a  question  in  which 
he  is  interested,  and  yet  Peter  Allen  was  allowed  to  vote 
on  questions  distinctly  affecting  his  continuance  in  that 
house  as  a  member. 

The  result  is  that  the  council  of  appointment,  chosen 
by  the  vote  of  Peter  Allen,  had  no  moral  right  to  exercise 
the  functions  of  their  office,  procured  by  a  species  of  le- 
gislative pettifogging  and  barefaced  trickery. 

The  council  of  appointment  which  had  been  created 
after  this  severe  contest,  had  very  little  to  do.  Few  of- 
fices were  or  became  vacant,  and  the  incumbents  were  all, 
or  nearly  all,  the  political  friends  of  the  council.  Gen. 
Porter  resigned  the  office  of  secretary  of  state,  and  Robert 
Tillotson,  a  very  worthy  and  accomplished  man,  the  son 
of  the  late  secretary  Doct.  Tillotson,  was  appointed  in 
his  place. 

Some  gentlemen  of  the  republican  party,  then  in  Alba- 
ny, gave  Allen  a  dinner,  which  I  believe  was  all  he  ever 
received  for  the  shameful  prostitution  of  himself  for  party 
purposes. 

The  governor's  speech  was  principally  occupied  in  re- 
marks relating  to  the  war.  He  did  not  submit  any  spe- 
cial recommendations  on  any  subject  of  importance.     In 


1S16.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  419 

relation  to  the  contemplated  Erie  canal,  ■whlchnow  began 
to  excite  universal  attention,  he  merely  said, 

"  It  will  rest  with  the  legislature,  whether  the  prospect 
of  connecting  the  waters  of  the  Hudson  with  those  of  the 
Western  Lakes  and  of  Champlain,  is  not  sufficiently  im- 
portant to  demand  the  appropriation  of  some  part  of  the  re- 
venues of  the  state  to  its  accomplishment,  without  impo- 
sing too  great  a  burthen  upon  our  constituents.  The  first 
route  being  an  object  common  with  the  states  of  the  west, 
we  may  rely  on  their  zealous  co-operation  in  any  judicious 
plan  that  can  perfect  the  water  communication  in  that  di- 
rection. As  it  relates  to  the  connecting  the  waters  of  the 
Hudson  with  those  of  Lake  Champlain,  we  may  with 
equal  confidence,  count  on  the  same  spirited  exertions  of 
the  patriotic  and  enterprising  state  of  Vermont." 

From  the  above  extract,  jt  will  be  perceived  that  he  was 
far  from  being  willing  to  commit  himself  in  favor  of  the 
measure.  His  words  are  measured  with  great  care.  In- 
deed, his  allusion  to  the  "  imposing  too  great  a  burden 
on  our  (their)  constituents,"  seems  to  me  evidently  thrown 
in  for  the  purpose  of  creating  alarm. 

After  the  controversy  in  relation  to  Allen,  no  serious 
collisions  took  place  between  the  federal  and  republican 
parties,  during  the  remainder  of  the  session,  but  the 
foundation  for  very  fierce  and  lasting  animosities  between 
different  sections  of  the  democratic  party  was  shortly  af- 
terwards laid,  or  rather  a  foundation  for  such  collisions 
having  previously  been  laid,  the  consequences  of  such 
collisions  began  now  to  be  exhibited. 

We  have  seen  Judge  Spencer,  whose  towering  influence 
in  the  democratic  party  had  long  been  felt  throughout  the 
state,  and  especially  in  the  legislature, — an  influence,which 
in  public  estimation,  received  an  immense  increase  by  the 
prostration  of  De  Witt  Clinton, — recently,  and  no  doubt 
unexpectedly   to   him,   as  well  as  most   of  the  lookers 


420  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1916. 

on,  defeated,  in  his  favorite  views  in  relation  to  an 
United  States  senator,  and  perhaps  we  may  add  in  relation 
to  the  appointment  of  an  attorney  general.  The  deceased 
Mr.  Hildreth,  who,  while  the  democratic  party  had  the 
power  of  controlling  that  appointment,  held  that  office 
until  his  death,  considered,  and  perhaps  truly,  that  he  re- 
ceived the  appointment  through  the  influence  of  his  friend, 
the  judge;  and  it  could  not  have  been  a  very  pleasing  re- 
flection to  Mr.  Spencer,  that  the  office,  "was  now  possessed 
by  a  man  who  obtained  it  not  only  without  his  aid,  but 
against  his  wishes.  The  incumbent  of  that  office  in  con- 
nexion with  Gov.  Tompkins,  had  had  the  address  to 
thwart  his  most  cherished  hopes  of  placing  a  man,  in 
whom,  above  all  others,  he  confided,  in  the  senate  of  the 
United  States;  and  what,  perhaps,  was  still  more  painful, 
the  contest  in  relation  to  the  matter  had  aflbrded  a  demon- 
stration that  he  could  he  beaten. 

So  great  is  the  change  in  the  working  of  our  system  of 
government,  since  the  abolition  of  the  council  of  appoint- 
ment, and  the  election  by  the  people  of  most  of  those  of- 
ficers who  were  created  by  that  branch  of  the  executive 
government,  that  if  it  be  not  now,  it  will  hereafter  be  al- 
most unaccountable  how  an  individual,  not  officially  con- 
nected with  either  the  legislative  or  executive  department 
of  government,  could  have  acquired,  and  for  so  long  a 
time,  held  so  much  influence  as  Judge  Spencer  did  in  the 
state.     I  will  endeavor  to  explain  it. 

My  readers  will  bear  in  mind,  that  all  officers, including 
sheriffs,  clerks  of  counties  and  justices  of  the  peace,  were 
appointed  by  the  council  at  Albany.  The  appointment 
of  justices  conferred  a  more  effectual  means  on  the  central 
power,  of  influencing  the  mass  of  community,  than  all  the 
other  patronage  within  the  gift  of  the  government.  The 
control  over  these  officers  carried  the  influence  of  the  cen- 
tral power  into  every  town  and  even  the  most  obscure 


1816.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  421 

neighborhood  in  the  state.  A  judge  of  the  supreme 
court  takes  up  his  residence  in  Albany  j  under  the  old  cir- 
cuit system  his  official  duties,  in  the  course  of  three  or  four 
years,  carried  him  into  every  county  in  the  state,  and  pre- 
sented him  in  an  attitude  most  favorable  to  the  people  of 
the  respective  counties.  Four  times  a  year  many  of  the 
lawyers,  from  various  parts  of  the  state,  were  required  to 
attend  the  supreme  court  at  bar.  Would  it  be  difficult 
for  a  judge  to  form  an  intimate  and  friendly  acquaintance 
with  some  citizen  of  each  county,  perhaps  a  lawyer,  with 
whom  he  could  communicate,  especially  when  such  law- 
yer ascertained  that  by  this  intercourse  he  could,  through 
the  influence  of  the  judge,  procure  appointments  for  his 
friends,  and  in  that  way  increase  his  influence  and  impor- 
tance at  home.  The  people,  say  for  instance,  of  Orange 
county,  find  that  the  recommendations  to  office,  if  given 
by  JVTr.  B.,  are  sure  to  be  successful.  If  two  men,  (C.  and 
D.,)  of  the  town  of  Warwick  are  candidates  for  the  office 
of  justice  of  the  peace,  and  Mr.  B.  writes  to  the  judge  in 
behalf  of  C,  and  he  is  appointed  in  preference  to  D.,  Mr 
B.,by  such  operations  in  several  other  towns  in  the  county, 
will  soon  be  found  to  be  an  influential  man  in  the  county 
of  Orangej  and  when  members  of  assembly  or  a  member 
of  congress  are  to  be  nominated,  by  a  county  caucus, 
whose  advice  is  so  likely  to  be  followed  as  Mr.  B.'s  ? 
On  the  other  hand,  B.  knows  that  his  power  depends  upon 
sustaining  the  influence  and  power  of  his  patron  at  the 
seat  of  government.  Hence,  he  will  endeavor  that  the 
assemblymen  and  senators,  when  they  arrive  at  Albany, 
shall  listen  to,  and  follow  the  advice  of  the  man  through 
whom  he  derives  a  considerable  portion  of  his  consequence. 
It  cannot  fail  of  being  perceived  that  the  tendency  of  this 
process  is  to  increase  the  political  power  of  B.  in  the 
county  of  Orange,  while  that  very  increase  adds  to  the 
power  of  the  judge  stationed  at  the  capitol.     Now  we  will 


422  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [IS  1 6. 

suppose  a  judge  of  the  supreme  court  to  possess  some 
such  confidential  friend,  in  all,  or  nearly  all,  the  principal 
counties  in  the  state,  producing  the  same  results  as  I  have 
supposed  to  have  been  produced  in  the  county  of  Orange. 
Will  not  these  petty  regents  in  the  dififerent  counties 
create  in  their  patron  a  grand  regent  at  the  capitol  1  By 
some  such  means.  Judge  Spencer  acquired  and  possessed 
great  power  in  creating  yearly  the  appointing  power,  and 
the  ability  to  create  generally  carries  with  it  the  ability  to 
control  the  thing  created.  Judge  Spencer  was,  and  is 
truly,  a  great  man,  but  he  was  not  only  fond  of  power  but 
fond  of  exercising  it.  He  was  industrious,  bold,  enterpri- 
sing and  persevering.  To  these  qualities  it  may  be  added, 
that  he  was  a  man  of  a  commanding  intellect,  and  one  of 
the  ablest  judges,  if  not  the  ablest  judge,  in  the  United 
States.  A  high  and  enviable  reputation  as  a  jurist  was 
accorded  to  him,  as  well  by  opponents  as  friends,  and 
from  his  judicial  station  he  could  not  be  removed,  let  par- 
ties change  and  fluctuate  as  they  might. 

The  political  power  of  Judge  Spencer  was  at  its  zenith 
from  1813  to  1815.  In  1816  the  popularity  of  Gov. 
Tompkins,  and  the  talents,  smooth  and  fascinating  address, 
and  management  of  Martin  Van  Buren,  and  their  constant 
intercourse  with  the  members  of  the  legislature,  enabled 
them  to  gain  an  influence  in  that  body  which  the  Judge 
became  apprehensive  would  curtail,  if  not  prostrate,  his 
own,  and  he  therefore  deemed  it  desirable  to  call  in  some 
further  aid.  There  was  no  man  who  could  balance  and 
neutralize  the  influence  of  Tompkins  and  Van  Buren  so 
effectually  as  De  Witt  Clinton,  could  he  be  restored  to  the 
confidence  of  the  ruling  party.     But  could  he  be  restored  ? 

Judge  Spencer  had  taken  a  most  active  and  efficient 
part  in  destroying  that  confidence.  In  saying  this,  I  do 
not  mean  to  say  that  many  parts  of  the  political  conduct  of 
Mr.  Clinton  had  not  merited  the  animadversions  of  Judge 


1816.]  OF    NEW-YOHK.  423 

Spencer,  or  any  other  honest  man  attached  to  the  republi- 
can interest.  But,  could  Judge  Spencer,  who  had  been 
unreserved  in  his  denunciations  to  his  republican  friends, 
go  to  those  very  friends  and  urge  the  restoration  to  their 
confidence  and  support  the  man  he  had  denounced  1  and, 
if  he  could  bring  himself  to  attempt  it,  could  he  hope  for 
success  in  the  attempt  1  Would  not  his  own  words  be 
retorted  upon  him  1  A  less  enterprising,  a  less  daring 
mind  than  Judge  Spencer's,  would  surely  have  been  de- 
terred from  such  an  undertaking.  But  he  did,  neverthe- 
less, undertake  it,  and  what  is  more  wonderful,  his  efforts 
were  successful.  I  must  not  be  understood  as  intending 
to  represent,  or  even  insinuate,  that  Judge  Spencer,  on 
this  or  any  other  occasion,  yielded  his  assent  to  any  mea- 
sure, or  the  support  of  any  man,  when  he  believed,  or 
suspected,  that  such  assent  would  prejudice  substantially 
the  great  interests  of  the  public.  Far  from  it.  On  the 
contrary,  I  believe  him  to  have  been  honest  and  patriotic 
in  his  views;  but  I  believe  he  looked  on  these  matters  as 
mere  personal  questions,  and  thought  he  had  a  right  to 
pursue  a  course  calculated  to  adrance  his  own  views  and 
interest,  when  that  interest  was  not  incompatible  with  the 
public  good. 

Unfortunately  for  Mr.  Clinton,  most  of  his  republican 
friends,  who  at  this  time  adhered  to  him,  rather  injured 
than  aided  him.  With  the  exception  of  T.  A.  Emmett, 
who  really  could  not  be  said  to  be  a  party  politician, 
and  S.  Miller  of  whom  I  have  before  spoken,  and  P. 
C.  Van  Wyck,  who  was  a  man  of  fine  talents,*  Mr. 
Clinton's  New-York  supporters  were  generally  men  of 
broken  down  fortunes,  and  appeared  to  do  little  else  than 
laud  the  man  they  had  selected  for  their  patron.  Several 
of  the  lobby  agents  for  the  Bank  of  America,  and 
some  of  the  republican  members   of  the  N.  Y.  legisla- 

*  A  few  words  contained  in  the  first  edition  are  here  omitted,  as  they  have  been 
supposed  to  imply  an  imputation  against  Mr.  Van  Wyck,  not  intended  by  the  author 


424  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1816. 

ture,  who  aided  in  chartering  that  institution,  claimed  to 
be  the  especial  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton.  Some  of  them, 
no  doubt,  finding  that  they  had  lost  their  standing  and 
reputation,  professed  the  most  ardent  regard  for  Mr.  Clin- 
ton, in  the  hope  that  their  unpopularity  would  be  imputed 
to  the  support  of  an  unsuccessful  political  leader,  rather 
than  to  their  own  misconduct.  All  these  men  were  loud 
in  their  praises  of  Mr.  Clinton,  especially  in  his  presence; 
and  unluckily,  in  common  with  many  other  great  men,  he 
was  rather  too  well  pleased  to  hear  his  own  praises 
chaunted,  without  much  scrutiny  into  the  characters  or 
merits  of  the  pipers.  In  the  re-union  with  him,  contem- 
plated by  Judge  Spencer,  the  latter,  therefore,  had  every- 
thing to  lose  and  but  little  to  gain,  while  Mr.  Clinton, 
politically,  had  really  nothing  to  lose  and  every  thing  to 
gain. 

A  circumstance  occurred  shortly  before  the  meeting  of 
the  legislature,  that  put  Mr.  Clinton  directly  in  communi- 
cation with  its  members.  A  great  and  highly  respectable 
meeting  of  the  citizens  of  New- York  was  held,  at  which 
William  Bayard  presided,  and  John  Pintard  was  secretary, 
when  spirited  resolutions  were  adopted  in  favor  of  con- 
structing the  Erie  and  Champlain  canals,  and  an  able  me- 
morial to  the  legislature  was  drawn  up  by  Mr.  Clinton,  in 
the  name  of  the  meeting.  As  the  agent  of  this  meeting, 
and  as  canal  commissioner,  the  presence  of  Mr.  Clinton,  at 
Albany,  became  necessary,  and  the  discharge  of  his  duties 
brought  him  frequently  in  contact  with  the  members  of 
the  legislature.  It  is  not  my  intention  to  enter  into  a  de- 
tail of  the  agency  which  Mr.  Clinton  had  in  procuring  the 
adoption  of  our  splendid  system  of  internal  improvements, 
nor  of  the  action  of  political  men  in  relation  to  that  mea- 
sure, further  than  the  measure  itself  shall  seem  to  affect 
the  standing  and  influence  of  politicians,  and  the  action  of 
parties. 


181G.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  425 

Professor  Renwick,  in  his  biography  of  Clinton,  and 
other  writers  who  have  favored  us  with  the  history  of  the 
rise  and  progress  of  the  canal  policy,  will,  of  course,  be 
consulted  by  those  who  are  desirous  of  obtaining  an  accu- 
rate and  correct  knowledge  of  that  interesting  and  impor- 
tant branch  of  the  history  of  the  state  of  New-York. 

On  the  7th  of  February  a  highly  respectable  meeting  of 
gentlemen  of  both  political  parties  was  held  in  Albany,  of 
which  Chancellor  Lansing  was  chairman,  and  the  comp- 
troller, Archibald  Mclntyre,  was  secretary,  for  the  purpose 
of  memorializing  the  legislature  in  behalf  of  constructing 
the  canal. 

This  meeting  and  its  proceedings  had  an  effect,  not 
only  to  give  an  impetus  to  the  canal  policy,  but  to  give 
weight  to  the  communications  of  Mr.  Clinton  in  his  inter- 
course with  the  members,  and  to  diminish  that  apprehen- 
sion, which  small  politicians  sometimes  entertain,  of  con- 
tamination by  any  intercourse  with  a  person  who  is  politi- 
cally put  in  Coventry  by  the  party  to  which  they  belong. 

The  federalists,  before  the  adjournment  of  the  legisla- 
ture, nominated  Rufus  King  for  governor,  and  George 
Tibbits,  of  Troy,  for  lieutenant  governor. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  democratic  party  held  a  legisla- 
tive caucus  on  the  20th  of  February,  at  which  Governor 
Tompkins  and  Lt.  Gov.  Taylor  were  nominated  for  a  re- 
election. 

A  law  was  passed  by  this  legislature,  entitled,  "An  Act 
to  provide  for  the  improvement  of  the  internal  navigation 
of  this  state."  By  this  statute  the  laws  passed  on  this 
subject,  in  1811  and  1812,  were  repealed,  and  Stephen 
Van  Rensselaer,  De  Witt  Clinton,  Samuel  Young,  Joseph 
Ellicott  and  Myron  Holley,  were  appointed  canal  commis- 
sioners. Mr.  Van  Rensselaer  was  selected  in  consequence 
of  his  great  wealth  and  high  character  for  integrity,  and 
disinterested  zeal  for  the  welfare  and  prosperity  of  the 


426  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1816. 

state;  Mr.  Clinton,  on  account  of  the  intimate  acquaint- 
ance he  had  acquired  with  all  matters  relating  to  the  sub- 
ject, his  admitted  zeal  for  the  improvement,  and  his  great 
talents.  Mr.  Young  was  highly  esteemed  for  his  talents 
and  integrity.  He  was  the  friend  of  Gov.  Tompkins,  and 
had  been  supposed  to  be  in  doubt  as  to  the  expediency  of 
the  undertaking.  His  appointment  may  have  been  in 
part  caused  by  a  desire  of  the  supporters  of  the  canal  poli- 
cy to  avail  themselves  of  his  influence  with  his  immediate 
political  friends,  and  to  divest  the  board  of  commissioners 
of  any  party  character.  Joseph  Ellicott  was  the  agent 
of  the  great  Holland  Land  Company,  residing  at  Batavia; 
of  course  a  zealous  friend  to  the  canal,  and  a  man  of 
wealth  and  influence;  and  Myron  Holley  was  that  year  a 
member  of  the  Assembly  from  Ontario  county;  a  man  of 
respectable  literary  attainments,  personally  much  esteemed, 
and  ardent  in  his  support  of  the  canal  policy.  These 
commissioners  were,  by  this  act,  formed  into  a  regular 
board,  and  required  to  cause  all  necessary  surveys  and 
estimates  to  be  made,  to  receive  grants  and  donations,  and 
to  report  the  result  of  their  doings  to  the  next  legislature. 
The  republican  party  this  year,  was,  on  the  score  of 
talent,  when  compared  with  the  federalists,  indifferently 
represented.  Mr.  Young,  although  he  had  been  speaker 
of  the  last  assembly,  was  not  returned  as  a  member  from 
Saratoga.  A  combination  had  been  formed  against  him, 
which  defeated  his  nomination  by  the  republican  conven- 
tion held  in  that  county;  and  although,  I  believe,  he  was 
voted  for  by  a  portion  of  the  electors,  he  did  not  obtain  a 
plurality  of  votes;  and  this  schism  among  the  republicans 
of  Saratoga  occasioned  the  election  of  one  federal  member, 
(Mr.  Hamilton,)  although  the  county  was  democratic  by 
a  considerable  majority.  Mr.  John  H.  Beach  from  Cayu- 
ga, Col.  Leavenworth  from  Delaware,  and  Mr  Cruger,  the 
speakfer,  were  almost  the  only  members  who  took  much 


1816.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  427 

part  in  the  debates.  They  were  men  respectable  for  their 
standing  in  society,  and  two  of  them  held  a  middling  rank 
at  the  bar  as  lawyers^  but  they  were  inexperienced  as  le- 
gislators, and  lacked  confidence  in  their  own  powers,  when 
drawn  into  competition  with  the  federal  leaders  in  the 
assembly.  Doct.  G.  H.  Barstow  from  Tioga,  was,  that 
winter,  for  the  first  time,  a  member  of  a  legislative  body. 
He  was  a  clear  headed,  sagacious  man,  of  a  discriminating 
mind,  but  he  was  diffident  and,  at  that  time,  wholly  un- 
used to  public  extemporary  speaking. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  federalists  were  represented  by 
Peter  A.  Jay,  a  son  of  the  late  governor,  one  of  the  first 
lawyers  of  the  city  of  New-York,  of  fine  native  intellec- 
tual powers  and  of  an  highly  cultivated  mind;  William 
A.  Duer  from  Dutchess,  now  known  as  an  able  and  ac- 
complished writer,  who  afterwards  held  the  office  of  judge 
of  the  third  circuit,  and  now  presides  over  Columbia  Col- 
lege with  distinguished  ability;  and  Thomas  J.Oakley ,who, 
although  a  new  member  of  the  legislature  of  New-York, 
had  been  for  some  time  before  a  member  of  congress,  and 
held  a  standing  in  that  body  highly  respectable.  For  my 
part,  I  consider  Thomas  J.  Oakley  one  of  the  most  talented 
men  which  the  state  of  New- York  has  produced.  His 
intellectual  powers  were  strong  and  vigorous,  and  he  was 
capable  of  immense  mental  labor.  Always  cool  and  cal- 
culating, in  the  highest  heat  of  debate  he  possessed  a  most 
perfect  self  control,  and  never  permitted  his  feelings  to 
get  the  better  of  hisjudgment.  As  a  clear,  ingenious  and 
logical,  though  sometimes  sophistical  reasoner,  he  has 
appeared  to  me  unrivalled  in  our  legislative  halls  at  Alba- 
ny. He  is  not  an  orator.  He  fails  of  being  so  from 
his  want  of  ardor  of  feeling,  and  his  utter  lack  of  imagi- 
native powers.  His  coolness,  his  caution,  his  forecast, 
and  his  perfect  self  command,  peculiarly  fit  him  for  a 
party  leader  in  a  legislative  assembly.     In  congress  he 


428  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1816. 

diflfered  from  the  over  zealous  eastern  federalists.  He 
wishedj  at  least,  to  manifest  an  ^apparent  disposition  to 
furnish  supplies  to  government  for  carrying  on  the  "war, 
and  to  confine  his  opposition  to  the  manner  in  which  the 
war  was  carried  on.  Mr.  Clopton,  an  old  and  sagacious 
politician  of  Virginia,  who  was  a  member  of  congress 
from  the  adoption  of  the  constitution  until  his  death,  told 
me,  in  1816,  that  had  the  federal  members  of  congress, 
during  the  war,  put  themselves  exclusively  under  the 
management  of  Oakley,  and  implicitly  followed  his  lead, 
in  his  judgment,  the  administration  would  have  been 
prostrated. 

Of  Jacob  Rutsen  Van  Rensselaer  I  have  already  spoken, 
as  a  man  of  respectable  talents,  adroit  as  a  debater,  and 
bold,  decided  and  active  as  a  political  partizan.  James 
Vanderpoel,  a  respectable  lawyer  from  Columbia  county, 
and  subsequently  judge  of  the  third  circuit,  and  James 
Lynch  from  Oneida  county,  now  a  judge  of  one  of  the 
New-York  courts,  were  also  members  of  the  assembly 
during  this  session,  and  contributed  by  their  talents  and 
influence  to  sustain  the  federal  side  of  the  question  in  that 
house. 

Before  giving  the  result  of  the  election,  it  may  be  pro- 
per to  state,  that  a  new  organization  had  been  made  rela- 
tive to  the  division  of  the  state  into  senatorial  districts;  by 
which,  among  other  alterations,  the  counties  of  Albany, 
Otsego,  Schoharie  and  Chenango,  had  been  annexed  to, 
and  made  a  part  of  the  middle  district. 

The  election  resulted,  as  had  been  anticipated,  in  favor 
of  the  republican  party.  The  city  of  New-York  elected 
republican  members  of  assembly,  and,  in  the  state,  more 
than  two-thirds  of  the  members  elect,  of  that  body,  be- 
longed to  the  same  class  of  politicians.  All  the  senato- 
rial districts,  except  the  eastern,  were  democratic;  and 
Tompkins  and  Taylor  were  re-elected  by  a  large  majority. 


1816.]  OP   NEW- YORK.  429 

The  senators  elected  from  the  southern  district,  were 
John  D.  Ditmis  and  Walter  Bowne.      Middle — Martin 
Van  Buren,  John  Noyes  and  Peter  Swart.     Western— 
Ephraim  Hart,  John  Knox  and  William  M»llory. 


430  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1816. 

CHAPTER  XXll 

FROM  IVUY  1,  1816,  TO  MAY  1,  1817. 

Before  the  close  of  the  29th  session  of  the  legislature, 
a  personal  interview  had  taken  place  between  Mr.  Clinton 
and  Judge  Spencer,  and  a  reconciliation  had  been  eflfected. 
There  were  other  besides  political  reasons  which  led  to 
this.  Mrs.  Spencer  was  the  sister  of  De  Witt  Clinton; 
and  it  could  not  but  be  painful  to  her  that  such  a  state  of 
feeling  should  exist  between  her  husband  and  brother,  as 
prevented  even  their  speaking  to  each  other.  She  was  a 
perfectly  amiable  woman,  and  the  judge  properly  apprecia- 
ted her  merits.  He  therefore  did  not  fail  of  being  desi- 
rous to  remove  this    cause  of  her  uneasiness  and  anxiety. 

On  the  8th  of  July,  the  council  of  appointment  again 
met  in  New-York,  and  removed  John  Van  Ness  Yates 
from  the  office  of  Recorder  of  Albany,  and  appoint- 
ed Philip  S.  Parker  in  his  place.  This  removal  was 
said  to  have  been  effected  by  a  very  pressing  letter  of 
Judge  Spencer,  addressed  to  Mr.  Ross,  one  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  council.  Mr.  Parker  was  a  nephew  and  rather  a 
favorite  of  Judge  Spencer.  Mr.  Yates  was  a  man  of  great 
versatility  of  talent,  social,  companionable,  and  on  free  and 
eesy  terms  with  all  classes  of  citizens;  and  he  had  many 
friends,  especially  among  what  was  called  the  lower  order 
of  community;  but  he  was  somewhat  irregular  in  his  habits 
and  lax  in  his  morals.  He  had  been  for  a  long  time  record- 
er. The  alleged  cause  of  his  removal,  was  that  he  had  been 
an  agent  for  the  applicants  for  a  charter  of  the  Bank  of  Ame- 
rica, and  a  Clintonian.  With  respect  to  the  aid  he  gave  to 
the  bank  applicants,the  charge  seemed  rather  stale;  and  as  to 
Lis  having  been  a  Clintonian,  the  time  had  arrived  when  it 


1817.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  431 

did  not  seem  quite  consistent  for  Judge  Spencer  to  allege 
that  as  a  sufficient  cause  of  his  removal  from  office.  It  was 
also  saidj  that  his  ill-health  prevented  him  from  being 
able  properly  to  discharge  his  official  duties.  The  office, 
however,  was  not  an  important  one,  and  his  removal  from 
it  would  hardly  excuse  this  notice,  was  it  not  that  less 
than  two  years  afterwards  it  became  the  cause  of  serious 
political  embarrassment,  which  will  be  stated  in  its  proper 
place. 

As  Gov.  Tompkins  had  been  nominated,  and  accepted 
the  nomination,  for  the  office  of  vice-president,  it  was  an- 
ticipated that  the  office  of  governor  of  this  state  would 
become  vacant  on  the  fourth  of  March,  then  next;  and 
very  active  measures  were  taken  by  the  friends  of  Mr. 
Clinton  during  this  summer  to  procure  his  nomination  by 
the  republican  party  for  the  office  of  governor,  when  it 
should  become  vacant.  The  friends  of  the  canal  were 
generally  in  his  favor,  and  this  brought  nearly  the  whole 
of  the  great  west  to  his  support.  Mr.  Van  Buren,  al- 
though he  was  opposed  to  Mr.  Clinton,  seems  not  at  this 
time  to  have  felt  much  apprehension. 

The  legislature  met  on  the  5th  of  November,  for  the 
purpose  of  choosing  presidential  electors.  David  Woods 
cf  Washington  county,  was  chosen  speaker.  He  receiv- 
ed eighty-four  votes,  while  the  federal  candidate,  James 
Emott    of  Dutchess  county,  received  but  thirty-three. 

The  governor's  speech  contains  nothing  remarkable. 
He  did  not  utter  a  single  word  on  the  subject  which  at 
that  time  engrossed  more  of  public  attention  than  any 
other, — which  was  the  construction    of  the  grand  canal. 

His  silence  on  so  important  a  matter  seems  to  me  whol- 
ly inexcusable.  The  constitution  commanded  him  "  to 
recommend  such  matters  to  the  legislature,  as  should  ap- 
pear to  him  to  concern  the  good  government,  )velfare  and 
prosperity   of  the   state."      He  knew    that   the   masrni- 


432  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1817. 

ficent  scheme  of  opening  a  navigable  communication  be  ■ 
tween  the  tide  waters  of  Hudson's  river,  and  the  great 
lakes,  deeply  agitated  the  public  mind;  and  that  it  would 
become  the  duty  of  that  legislature  to  decide  that  great 
and  momentous  question.  Was  it  not  his  duty,  as  the 
governor  of  the  state,  to  have  officially  advised  them  of 
his  opinion  on  the  matter?  If  he  was  in  favor  of  it  he 
should  have  so  declared  himself;  if  against  it,  he  should 
have  warned  them  not  to  adventure  on  the  measure.  There 
was  a  timidity,  (may  I  not  say  a  littleness?)  in  thus  eva- 
ding the  question,  unsuitable  to  the  character  of  an  able, 
honest  and  independent  statesman. 

Electors  were  chosen  favorable  to  the  election  of  Mon- 
roe and  Tompkins.  The  ticket  was  headed  by  Henry 
Rutgers  of  New-York,  and  Samuel  Chipman  of  one  of  the 
western  counties,  as  state  electors.  It  does  not  tell  well  for 
our  institutions,  when  I  affirm,  what  I  verily  believe  to  be 
true,  that  ninety-nine  out  of  one  hundred  of  the  citizens 
of  this  state  would  have  preferred  some  other  man  for 
president  to  James  Monroe.  But  it  is  nevertheless  true, 
that  it  is  many  times  excusable,  and  sometimes  one's  duty, 
to  vote  for  men  who  are  not  our  first  choice;  upon  the 
principle  of  submitting  to  a  lesser,  for  the  purpose  of 
avoiding  a  greater  evil.  The  legislature  adjourned  to  the 
21st  of  January,  then  next. 

On  the  28th  of  January,  1817,  the  governor  sent  a  mes- 
sage to  the  legislature  recommending  the  entire  abolition 
of  slavery  in  the  state  of  New- York,  to  take  place  on  the 
fourth  day  of  July,  1827.  By  an  act  passed  some  years 
before,  all  persons  born  of  parents  who  were  slaves  after 
July,  1799,  were  to  be  free;  males  at  twenty-eight  and 
females  at  twenty-five  years  of  age.  The  present  legisla- 
ture adopted  the  recommendation  of  the  governor.  This 
great  measure  in  behalf  of  human  rights,  which  was  to 
obliterate  forever  the  black  and  foul  stain  of  slavery  from 


1817.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  433 

the  escutcheon  of  our  own  favored  state,  was  produced  by 
the  energetic  action  of  Cadwallader  D.  Colden,  Peter  A, 
Jay,  William  Jay,  Daniel  D.  Tompkins  and  other  dis- 
tinguished philanthropists,  chiefly  residing  in  the  city  of 
New-York.  The  Society  of  Friends,  who  never  slumber 
when  the  principles  of  benevolence  and  a  just  regard  to 
equal  rights  call  for  their  action,  were  zealously  engaged  in 
this  great  enterprise.  Gov.  Tompkins  deserves  to  be,  and 
his  memory  will  be  embalmed  in  the  bosom  of  every  hu- 
man being  who  loves  and  reveres  the  munificient  and  mer- 
ciful Father  of  the  Universe,  and  duly  appreciates  the 
equal  rights  of  man  for  the  efficient  part  he  took  in  be- 
half of  the  crushed  slave.  If  in  reference  to  internal  im 
proveraents,  his  action  was  that  of  a  calculating  and  wily 
politician,  in  the  cause  of  humanity  he  was  bold,  energetic 
and  decisive.  Here,  he  did  not  stop  to  calculate.  Here, 
governed  by  the  humane  and  generous  feelings  which 
were  inherent  in  his  nature,  (for  I  believe  constitutionally 
he  possessed  a  kind  and  generous  heart,)  he  did  not  hesi- 
tate to  assume  responsibilities,  and  obey  the  dictates  of 
justice  and  the  impulse  of  humanity.  I  can  forgive  him 
for  his  conduct  in  relation  to  the  canal,  but  I  could  never 
forgive  myself  were  I  for  a  moment  to  forget  to  be  grate- 
ful to  him  for  this  great  and  godlike  act. 

When  the  legislature  convened,  it  was  found  that  a 
strong  and  considerably  powerful  portion  of  the  republi- 
can members  were  for  nominating  Mr.  Clinton  for  govern- 
or, when  that  office  should  become  vacant  by  the  election 
of  Gov.  Tompkins  to  the  vice-presidency.  Among  the 
most  active  were  Mr.  Hart  and  Mr.  Ross  of  the  senate, 
and  Mr.  Speaker  Woods  and  G.  W.  Barstow  of  the  as- 
sembly. Still,  such  were  the  remaining  prejudices  against 
Mr.  Clinton,  founded  on  his  conduct  during  the  presiden- 
tial canvass  with  Mr.  Madison,  and  more  especially  upon 
nis  action  during  the  contest  for  the  election  of  governor 

28 


434  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1317. 

in  1813j  aided  and  kept  alive  as  these  prejudices  were, by 
the  address  and  efforts  of  Gov.  Tompkins  and  Mr.  Van 
Buren,  that  it  was  doubtful  whether  a  majority  for  him  in 
the  legislature  could  be  obtained.  But  Mr.  Clinton  had 
an  immensely  powerful  ally  who  was  not  a  member  of  the 
legislature,  and  that  ally  was  Ambrose  Spencer.  He  was 
truly  a  host  within  himself. 

The  members  most  efficient  in  opposing  the  nomination 
of  Mr.  Clinton,  were  Van  Buren,  P.  R.  Livingston  and 
Bowne  of  the  senate,  and  the  representatives  in  the  as- 
sembly from  the  city  of  New-York,  and  generally,  the 
members  from  the  southern  district. 

Three  distinct  schemes  were  considered  by  Mr.  Van  Bu- 
ren, and  those  acting  with  him,  to  defeat  the  project  of 
making  Mr.  Clinton  governor. 

First.  It  was  proposed,  inasmuch  as  neither  the  consti- 
tution of  this  state  nor  of  the  United  States,  had  expressly 
declared  that  it  was  incompatible  for  a  vice-president  of 
the  United  States  to  hold  that  office  and  at  the  same  time 
hold  the  office  of  governor,  that  Gov.  Tompkins  should 
hold  both  offices.  This  expedient  was  soon  rejected  and 
probably  by  Mr.  Tompkins  himself.  It  is  not  to  be  presum- 
ed that  so  wary  a  politician,  then  in  the  prime  of  life,  would 
venture  to  encounter  the  clamor,  which  he  must  have  fore- 
seen, the  attempt  to  execute  such  a  plan  would  excite;  and 
what  was  worse,  such  clamor  would  be  well  founded;  for 
although,  the  holding  of  the  two  offices  was  not  expressly 
unconstitutional,  yet  it  was  most  evident  that  it  was  palpa- 
bly inconsistent  with  the  spirit  of  the  two  governments 
and  that  the  anticipated  clamor  would  be  founded  on  the 
immutable  principles  of  right. 

Second.  The  twentieth  article  of  the  constitution  pro- 
vides, that  "  in  case  of  the  impeachment  of  the  governor, 
or  his  removal  from  the  office  by  death,  resignation  or  ab- 
sence from  the  state,  the  lieutenant  governor  shall  exer- 


1817.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  435 

cise  all  the  power  and  authority  appertaining  to  the  office 
of  governor  until  another  be  chosen,  or  until  the  governor 
absent  or  imp^ched  shall  return  or  be  acquitted."  Un- 
der this  clause  in  the  old  constitution  it  was  proposed  to 
claim  that  the  lieutenant  governor  would  constitutionally 
be  governor  until  the  regular  gubernatorial  election,  which 
would  not  take  place  until  the  year  1819.  But  to  this  the 
friends  of  Mr.  Clinton  replied,  that  this  clause  merely  in- 
tended that  in  case  of  the  death,  resignation,  &c.,  of  the 
governor,  the  lieutenant  governor  should  execute  the  power 
of  a  governor,  only  until  the  next  succeeding  annual  state 
election;  and  in  support  of  this  construction,  they  referred 
to  the  seventeenth  article  of  the  constitution,  which  or- 
dains "  that  the  supreme  executive  power  and  authority  of 
this  state  shall  be  vested  in  a  governor,  and  that  statedly, 
once  in  every  three  years,  and  as  often  as  the  seat  of  go- 
vernme7it  shall  become  vacant,  a  wise  and  discreet  free- 
holder shall  be  chosen." 

After  some  reflection  it  would  seem  that  Mr.  Van  Bu- 
ren  did  not  choose  to  hazard  the  reputation  of  his  party, 
and  his  own  reputation  as  a  lawyer,  on  this  ground;  for 
although,  when  after  the  resignation  of  Gov.  Tompkins, 
a  bill  was  brought  into  the  assembly  to  provide  for  the  elec- 
tion of  a  successor,  by  Mr.  Ford  of  Jefferson  county,  which 
was  passed  by  seventy-four  members  voting  in  the  affirma- 
tive, yet  there  were  thirty-two  votes  in  the  negative,  nearly 
if  not  all  of  whom  were  opponents  of  the  nomination  of 
Mr.  Clinton.  In  the  senate,  the  bill  did  not  encounter 
a  very  serious  opposition.  Messrs.  Van  Buren,  Livingston 
and  others,  voting  for  it;  although  Messrs.  Bowne,  Can- 
tine,  (Van  Buren's  brother-in-law,)  and  others,  voted 
against  it. 

Third.  The  only  remaining  means  to  defeat  the  views 
of  the  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton,  was  to  nominate  some  oth- 


436  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1817. 

er  person  for  the  republican  candidate  for  governor,  by 
obtaining  a  majority  in  the  legislative  caucus. 

Three  of  the  members  of  the  council  elected  on  the 
13th  of  February,  of  this  year  were  decidedly  in  favor  of 
Mr.  Clinton;  that  is  to  say,  as  between  Mr.  Van  Burenand 
Judge  Spencer,  they  were  the  friends  of  Spencer.  This 
was  a  great  point  gained,  and  it  seems  to  me  Mr.  Van 
Buren  and  Gov.  Tompkins,  if  they  possessed  the  power, 
should  have  prevented  this.  Whether  they  made  any 
systematic  effort  to  do  so,  I  am  not  advised. 

The  council  consisted  of  Walter  Bowne  from  the  south- 
ern, John  Noyes  from  the  middle,  John  I .  Prendergast 
from  the  eastern,  and  Henry  Bloom  from  the  western  dis- 
tricts. All  but  Mr.  Bowne  were  for  Mr.  Clinton.  Hence, 
those  who  sought  office  well  knew  whose  nomination  for 
governor  it  was  their  interest  to  support. 

A  large  majority  of  the  federal  party  were  very  anx- 
ious for  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Clinton;  and  in  case  of 
his  nomination,  they  did  not  intend  any  opposition. 
Among  those  most  active  in  their  endeavors  to  produce 
this  determination  of  the  party,  were  Judges  Van  Ness 
and  Piatt,  J.  R.  Van  Rensselaer,  Elisha  Williams,  and 
generally  the  leading  federalists  in  the  city  of  New- York. 
The  ardent  temperament  of  Judge  Van  Ness,  and  some 
other  federalists  would  not  permit  them  to  remain  neutral 
on  the  question  respecting  the  nomination  then  agitated 
among  the  republicans. 

One  principle  ground  of  attack  upon  Mr.  Clinton,  by 
Mr.  Van  Buren  and  his  friends  was,  that  Clinton  kept  up 
a  secret  understanding  with  the  federalists,  and  was  still 
acting  in  concert  with  that  party;  and  the  zeal  manifested 
by  Judge  Van  Ness  and  others,  for  the  selection  of  Clin- 
ton as  the  gubernatorial  candidate,  was  managed  by  Mr. 
Van  Buren  with  great  skill  and  adroitness,  to  alarm  the 
fears  and  excite  the  jealousies  of  the  republicans.     Under 


1817.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  437 

these  circumstances,  and  considering  the  popularity  of 
Gov.  Tompkins,  and  the  extraordinary  tact,  address  and 
persevering  industry  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  the  friends  of 
Clinton  very  justly  entertained  apprehensions  that  after 
all,  in  a  purely  legislative  caucus,  a  majority  would  ulti- 
mately be  found  against  him. 

Heretofore,  it  had  been  the  uniform  usage  of  the  demo- 
cratic party  to  select  their  candidate  for  governor,  by  the 
majority  of  voices  declared  at  an  assemblage  of  men  com- 
posed exclusively  of  the  republican  members  of  the  legis- 
lature. By  this  arrangement  those  republican  citizens 
who  resided  in  counties  represented  by  federalists,  could 
have  no  voice  in  the  selection  of  a  candidate  for  that  im- 
portant office.  This  the  Clintonians  complained  of  as 
unreasonable  and  unjust.  They  therefore,  proposed  that 
delegates  should  be  chosen  in  county  convention,  which 
convention  should  be  formed  of  delegates  chosen  at  the 
primary  meetings  of  republicans  in  the  respective  towns, 
and  that  the  delegates  thus  chosen  from  the  counties  equal 
in  number  to  the  members  of  assembly  from  the  respec- 
tive counties,  should,  in  a  caucus  to  nominate  a  governor, 
have  the  same  rights  and  exercise  the  same  powers  as  re- 
republican  members  of  the  legislature.  It  was,  I  believe, 
well  understood,  that  in  the  greatest  proportion  of  the 
counties  represented  by  federalists,  a  very  large  majority 
of  the  republicans  were  in  favor  of  the  nomination  of  Mr. 
Clinton.  Besides,  the  Clintonians,  by  means  of  the  coun- 
cil of  appointment,  controlled  the  patronage  of  the  state, 
and  it  was  not  difficult  for  a  man  who  understood  the 
use  of  that  machine  as  well  as  Judge  Spencer,  to  con- 
trol by  its  influence,  the  action  of  most  of  the  county  con- 
ventions. Hence,  it  was  most  evident  that  the  adoption 
of  the  scheme  could  scarcely  fail  to  forward,  and  perhaps, 
I  may  add,  ensure  the  triumph  of  Mr.  Clinton. 

In  accordance  with  these  views,  a  republican  conven- 


438  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1817. 

tion  was  first  held  in  the  county  of  Albany,  at  which  John 
J.  Moak  was  chairmanj  and  Jacob  Lansing  secretary,  on  the 
fourth  of  February,  when  it  was  resolved  that  the  coun- 
ties represented  by  federalists  in  the  legislature,  ought  to 
be  represented  in  the  state  convention  to  nominate  a  go- 
vernor, by  republican  delegates  chosen  by  such  counties; 
and  Albany  being  represented  by  federalists,  John  Wood- 
worth,  Elisha  Jenkins,  John  McCarthy  and  Thomas  Har- 
man  were  appointed  delegates  from  the  county  of  Albany. 
Other  counties  respectable  for  their  wealth,  number,  and 
influence,  followed  the  example. 

The  delegates  to  the  state  convention  thus  chosen  were 
generally  favorable  to  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Clintonj  and 
like  the  delegates  from  the  county  of  Albany  were  com- 
posed of  republicans  of  high  standing  and  character. 
From  the  county  of  Oneida,  Nathan  Williams,  and  Henry 
Huntington  were  chosen,  and  from  the  county  of  Ontario, 
Gideon  Granger,  the  late  eminent  and  distinguished  post- 
master general  was  a  delegate. 

One  difficulty  which  Mr.  Van  Buren  and  his  friends  had 
to  encounter,  was  to  fix  upon  an  opposing  candidate  to 
Mr.  Clinton  in  caucus.  Who  was  the  man  that  would 
accept  the  post  and  combine  the  greatest  strength,  was  a 
question  not  easy  to  be  judiciously  decided.  They 
finally  fixed  on  Judge  Yates.  He  had  adhered  to,  and 
defended  Mr.  Clinton  long  after  he  had  been  denounced 
by  Judge  Spencer.  On  his  circuit  the  preceding  sum- 
mer, he  had  in  various  places  urged  his  friends  to  sup- 
port tWe  nomination  of  Clinton.  It  was  supposed  that 
the  known  friendship  of  Judge  Yates  to  Mr.  C.  would 
induce  some  of  the  latter  to  support  the  former;  but  a 
different  result  was  produced.  Men  felt  indignant  when 
they  were  invited  to  support  a  man  in  opposition,  who  had 
himself  taken  pains  and  been  instrumental  in  convincing 
them  that  Clinton  ought  to  be  chosen   governor.     A  day 


1817.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  439 

or  two  before  the  meeting  of  the  state  convention,  Judge 
Yates  positively  declined  being  a  candidate.  This  pro- 
duced some  confusion  in  the  ranks  of  the  opposition,  but 
they  finally  fixed  upon  Gen.  Peter  B.  Porter  as  their  can- 
didate. 

The  state  convention  was  held  at  the  capitol  on  the 
25th  March.  Upon  balloting  for  a  candidate,  Mr.  Clin- 
ton received  eighty-five  votes  and  Gen.  Porter  forty-one. 
It  was  understood  that  sixty  members  and  twenty-five 
delegates  voted  for  Mr.  Clinton,  and  thirty- three  members 
and  seven  delegates  for  his  opponent. 

A  few  days  before  the  fourth  of  March,  Mr.  Tompkins 
resigned  his  office  of  governor,  and  the  executive  autho- 
rity then  devolved  upon  Lieutenant  Governor  Taylor, 
who,  I  have  omitted  to  mention,  was  nominated  for  re- 
election. 

Mr.  Tayler  was  an  uneducated  man  of  great  native  sa- 
gacity. By  his  shrewdness  and  excellent  judgment,  and 
also  by  his  correct  business  habits,  he  had  in  early  life  ac- 
quired a  large  estate.  He  had  improved  his  fine  native 
mind  by  considerable  reading,  and  by  being  long  in  pub- 
lic office  he  had  acquired  from  association  a  deportment 
and  address  at  once  dignified  and  agreeable.  As  a  legis- 
lator he  was  always  exceedingly  careful  of  the  interest  of  the 
state,  and  it  was  with  great  reluctance  that  he  would  con- 
sent to  an  expenditure  of  its  funds  for  any  purpose.  Per- 
haps his  error  as  a  legislator  consisted  in  excessive  parsi- 
mony when  the  state  was  concerned.  His  only  fault  was 
one  which  is  common  to  all  men,  he  was  naturally  selfish, 
and  that  propensity  manifested  itself  not  only  in  his  pe- 
cuniary transactions,  but  in  the  bestowment  of  offices, 
which  either  directly  or  indirectly  came  within  his  control 
or  influence.  This  propensity  increased  with  his  age. 
Gov.  Tayler  had  no  children,  but  he  had  adopted  a  child 
who  was  his  relative,  and  who  afterwards  became  the  wife 


440  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1S17. 

of  Dr.  Charles  D.  Cooper,  as  his  daughter,  and  treated  her 
and  her  husband  and  their  children  as  his  own  family. 

No  important  business  was  done  by  the  council  while 
Mr,  Tayler  was  president  of  it,  with  one  single  exception. 
While  Mr.  Bowne  was  absent  in  New-York,  Mr.  Robert 
Tillotson  was  removed  from  the  office  of  secretary  of 
state,  and  Dr.  Charles  D.  Cooper  was  appointed  in  his 
place.  This  removal  was  without  reason,  and  indeed 
without  excuse  ;  For  no  objections  were  made  against 
the  political  principles  of  Mr.  Tillotson.  True,  he  had 
opposed  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Clinton,  which  he  had  an 
undoubted  right  to  do,  and  which  it  was  his  duty  to  do, 
provided  he  supposed  the  republican  party  would  thereby 
be  endangered,  or  that  Mr.  C.'s  administration  would  not 
be  so  beneficial  to  the  state,  as  would  be  likely  to  be  that 
of  some  other  person  who  might  be  selected.  Not  the 
least  suspicion  of  official  misconduct  was  breathed  against 
him;  he  had  held  the  office  but  a  very  short  time,  and 
came  into  it  not  by  the  removal  of  an  incumbent,  but  to 
fill  a  vacancy  produced  by  the  resignation  of  Mr.  Porter. 
It  was  a  mere  exertion  of  power  to  provide  a  place  for 
a  member  of  the  family  of  the  president  of  the  council. 
I  do  not  make  these  remarks  from  any  want  of  respect  to 
the  merits  and  character  of  Doct.  Cooper.  I  knew  him 
long  and  well,  as  a  remarkably  correct  man,  and  as  a  man 
of  integrity  and  honor.  I  am  equally  unwilling  to  charge 
Gov.  Tayler  with  intentional  error.  Long  habit  had  in- 
duced him  to  believe  that  if  a  man  could  legally  get  pos- 
session of  an  office  for  himself  or  friend,  he  ought  to  do  so. 
This  error  grew  out  of  the  form  of  the  government  itself, 
and  the  manner  in  which  public  opinion  had  tolerated  its 
action  through  that  singular  machine,  called  the  council  of 
appointment.*     Mr.  Noyes  and  Mr.  Bloom  were  both  il- 

*  Judge  Spencer  was  guilty  of  the  same  error  when  he  urged  on  the  preceding 
council  the  removal  of  Mr.  J.  Van  Ness  Yates  and  the  appointment  of  his  nephew. 


1S17.]  OF    NEW-yOEK.  441 

literate  men,  and  they,  as  well  as  Mr.  Prendergast,  were 
entirely  unaccustomed  to  public  life,  and  strangers  to  the 
possession  or  exercise  of  any  other  powers  than  those 
which  belong  to  private  citizens.  In  a  short  time,  they 
knew  that  they  should  return  to  private  life.  It  is 
not  uncharitable  to  say,  that  neither  of  them  knew  the 
extent  of  the  powers  they  possessed,  much  less  did  they 
consider  the  serious  effects  which  would  ultimately  be  pro- 
duced on  society  by  their  capricious  removals  and  appoint- 
ments; and  yet  nearly  all  the  officers  of  the  great  state  of 
New- York  were  then  held  subject  to  the  arbitrary  will  and 
pleasure  of  these  three  men. 

The  bill  committing  the  state  to  construct  the  canals, 
became  a  law  on  the  last  day  of  the  session,  which 
terminated  on  the  15th  April.  The  vote  in  the  assembly 
stood  sixty-four  to  thirty-six.  The  sixty-four  members 
who  voted  in  the  affirmative,  were  composed  principally, 
if  not  entirely  of  the  friends  of  the  nomination  of  Mr. 
Clinton  and  the  federalists.  The  thirty-six  noes  were 
chiefly  his  opponents. 

In  the  senate  the  bill  passed  by  a  vote  of  eighteen  to 
nine.  Those  who  voted  against  the  bill,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  two,  (Messrs.  Noyes  and  Bloom,  who  were  rather 
Spenceronians  than  Clintonians,)  were  opponents  of  Mr. 
Clinton.  There  were,  however,  five  senators  who  were 
zealous  anti-Clintonians  who  voted  for  the  bill.  Perhaps 
it  is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  this  result  was  produced  by 
the  efficient  and  able  efforts  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  who  was 
an  early  friend  of  the  measure. 

I  regret  to  feel  compelled  to  refer  to  the  proceedings  in 
the  court  of  errors  as  an  evidence,  or  rather  as  affording 
suspicion,  that  party  spirit  may  enter  into  that  high  judi- 
cial tribunal. 

A  bill  in  chancery  had  been  filed  by  the  residuary 
legatees   of  Walter   Franklin,  to   set  aside  a  sale  by  the 


442  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1817. 

executor  of  Franklin,  of  a  large  tract  of  land  to  John  L. 
Norton  and  De  Witt  Clinton.  Chancellor  Kent  dismissed 
the  bill  and  ordered  the  sale  confirmed.  The  complain- 
ants appealed  to  the  court  for  the  correction  of  errors, 
and  it  was  argued  in  the  winter  of  1817.  A  few  days  be- 
fore the  adjournment  of  the  legislature,  the  court  of  er- 
rors pronounced  their  judgment  affirming  the  decree  of 
the  chancellor.  Judge  Piatt  gave  the  opinion  of  the  ma- 
jority of  the  court,  (14  John.  Rep.  527,)  in  which  Judges 
Van  Ness  and  Yates  concurred,  and  Spencer  being  con- 
nected with  the  respondents,  gave  no  opinion.  Chief  Jus- 
tice Thompson  read  an  opinion  in"  favor  of  reversing  the 
decree.  All  this  was  in  accordance  with  the  regular 
course  of  proceedings  in  that  court.  The  questions  to  be 
decided  were  as  distinct  from  party  or  political  ques- 
tions, as  any  questions  can  be,  and  yet  every  senator  who 
voted  against  Mr.  Clinton's  nomination  in  caucus,  voted 
for  reversing  this  judgment;  and  every  one  who  voted  for 
Mr.  Clinton  in  caucus,  voted  for  him  on  the  decision  of 
this  case. 

It  is  true,  and  I  am  glad  it  is  true,  that  there  were 
questions  in  this  case  on  which  the  intelligent  and  hon- 
est might  differ;  but  how  thirty-five  men  should  happen 
to  differ  on  questions  upon  which  depended  the  rights 
of  a  distinguished  politician,  exactly  according  to  their 
respective  opinions  of  the  merits  of  that  individual,  is 
marvellous.  I  am  happy  to  state,  that  Mr.  Van  Buren 
having  been  employed  as  counsel  by  one  of  the  parties 
in  a  court  below,  did  not  vote.  It  is  hardly  possible 
that  precisely  this  result  could  have  been  produced, 
unless  some  of  the  senators  and  judges  in  this  case 
were  influenced  by  party  prejudices,  for  or  against  Mr 
Clinton. 


1817.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  443 

The  federalists  at,  and  previous  to  the  general  election, 
acted  in  accordance  with  the  views  they  had  previously 
intimated.  They  held  up  no  candidate  in  opposition  to 
Mr.  Clinton.  Indeed  they  went  further  in  their  courtesy 
towards  Mr.  Clinton  and  his  friends.  In  those  counties 
where  the  Clintonian  republicans  held  a  strong  prepon- 
derance, although  the  federal  party  in  such  counties  was 
confessedly  in  the  majority,  they  made  no  nomination  of 
members,  for  the  express  purpose  of  permitting  Clintonian 
republicans  to  be  elected.  Such  was  the  case  in  the  re- 
spectable county  of  Oneida:  a  county  which  at  that 
time  was  known  to  contain  a  large  federal  majority.  The 
federalists  of  Oneida  stated  that  if  the  republicans  would 
nominate  respectable  candidates  for  the  assembly,  who 
would  support  the  administration  of  Mr.  Clinton,  no  no- 
mination should  be  made  in  opposition  to  them.  The  re- 
publican party  in  that  county  did  not  afford  them  any  just 
reason  to  complain.  Among  the  candidates  which  they 
selected,  was  that  excellent  and  venerable  man,  Henry 
Huntington;  Nathan  Williams,  who  had  long  been  a  mem- 
ber of  congress,  and  was  afterwards  judge  of  the  fifth  circuit, 
and  George  Brayton,  a  man  universally  esteemed  and  be- 
loved. The  federalists,  however,  were  careful  to  place 
some  of  their  ablest  men  in  the  assembly  to  watch  over 
their  interest,  among  whom  was  Mr.  Oakley  from  Dutch- 
ess county. 

Mr.  Clinton  and  Mr.  Tayler  may  be  said  to  have 
been  elected  without  opposition,  for  although  the  Tam- 
many men  in  New-York  sent  tickets  into  every  county 
in  the  state,  on  which  the  name  of  Peter  B.  Porter 
for  governor  was  printed,  no  serious  effort  was  made  for 
his  election. 

The  senators  elected  this  year  were  Jonathan  Day- 
ton and   Stephen    Barnum,  from    the    southern    district; 


444  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1817. 

Jabez  D.  Hammond  and  John  Lounsbury,  from  the 
middle;  Roger  Skinner,  Samuel  Young  and  Henry  Yates, 
from  the  eastern;  and  Isaac  Wilson  and  Jediah  Prender- 
gast,  from  the  western  district.  They  were  of  course  all 
republicans. 


'^. 


I®  IS  WTl'lT'lf  CILttKf'irOH" 


446  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1817. 

In  pursuance  of  the  law  passed  the  last  session,  con- 
tracts had  been  made  for  constructing  parts  of  the  canal, 
and  during  the  summer  of  this  year  that  great  work  was 
commenced. 

Mr.  Clinton  convened  the  council  of  appointment  in 
August,  and,  on  the  27th  of  that  month,  they  removed 
John  L.  Broome  from  the  office  of  clerk  of  the  city  and 
county  of  New- York,  and  appointed  Benjamin  Ferris  in 
his  place.  They  also  removed  Robert  McComb,  son  of 
the  celebrated  land  speculator  Alexander  McComb,  from 
the  office  of  clerk  of  the  circuit,  and  replaced  John  W. 
Wyman  in  that  office. 

I  am  not  aware  of  any  other  cause  of  these  removals 
than  a  political  one,  and  I  know  of  no  political  cause, 
except  that  the  incumbents  were  Tammany  men.  No 
other  material  movements  were  made  by  the  council.  A 
great  pressure  was  made  on  the  governor,  by  his  old 
friends  who  had  been  turned  out  of  office  by  the  council 
of  1815,  but  he  excused  himself  to  them  by  alleging  that 
the  council  would  not  consent  to  any  thing  like  a  system 
of  general  removals.  I  shall  have  occasion,  hereafter,  to 
present  my  views  on  the  policy  which  the  governor's 
New-York  friends  desired  him  to  pursue,  in  relation  to 
removals  and  appointments. 

In  the  autumn  of  this  year,  Gov.  Clinton  issued  a  pro- 
clamation recommending  that  Thursday,  the  13th  Novem- 
ber, be  observed  as  a  day  of  thanksgiving  and  prayer.  I 
mention  the  circumstance  because  Gov.  Jay,  during  his 
administration,  issued  a  like  proclamation,  and  attempted 
to  adopt  the  custom,  which  had  prevailed  in  the  New- 
England  states  ever  since  the  landing  of  the  pilgrims  on 
the  rock  of  Plymouth,  of  setting  apart  one  day  in  the 
year  as  a  day  of  public  thanksgiving.  But,  after  issuing 
one  proclamation,  Mr.  Jay  found  it  necessary  to  abandon 
the  attempt,  it  being  represented,  by  his  opponents,  as  a 


1818]  OF    NEW- YORK.  447 

contrivance  to  enlist  the  religious  prejudices  of  the  com- 
munity in  his  favor.  The  proclamation  of  Gov.  Clinton 
was  well  received,  and  the  precedent  furnished  by  him  has 
since  been  followed  by  all  his  successors.  This,  I  think, 
affords  evidence  that  less  apprehension  of  danger  of  a 
connection  between  church  and  state,  or  religion  and  poli- 
tics, existed  in  the  public  mind  in  1817  than  in  1795. 

The  legislature  met  on  the  27th  of  January,  1818,  and 
David  Woods,  of  Washington  county,  was  re-elected 
speaker  without  opposition.  He  received  ninety-seven 
votes. 

I  have  now  arrived  at  a  period  when  I  became  a  mem  • 
ber  of  the  senate,  and  was  an  eye  and  ear  witness  to  many 
things  which  occurred.  I  hope  I  may  be  pardoned  in  the 
statements  which  I  shall  make  in  relation  to  my  own  mo- 
tives and  views.  I  assure  my  readers  it  is  not  from  a 
desire  to  exhibit  myself,  or  my  actions,  to  the  public,  that 
I  shall  indulge  in  this  sort  of  detail.  My  apology  for  it 
is,  that  I  know  what  my  own  views  and  motives  were,  and 
have  reason  to  believe  that  others  similarly  situated,  with 
whom  I  acted,  were  governed  by  the  same,  or  nearly  the 
same,  considerations. 

I  had  early  connected  myseUfwith  the  republican  party, 
and  was  strongly  attached  to  the  principles  held  by  that 
party.  What  little  of  official  distinctions  I  had  enjoyed, 
had  been  bestowed  on  me  by  the  republican  party.  I  had 
viewed  the  proceedings  of  the  eastern  federalists  with  ab- 
horrence; and  I  heartily  disapproved  of  the  conduct  of 
the  New- York  federalists,  during  the  war. 

As  early  as  the  year  1808, 1  had,  in  the  course  of  my 
business,  formed  a  personal  acquaintance  with  Mr.  Clin- 
ton. I  thought  well  of  him  as  a  man  and  as  a  statesman. 
When  he  was  a  candidate  for  the  presidency  he  received 
my  cordial  support,  because  I  believed  that,  if  elected,  he 
would  prosecute  with  greater  vigor  than  Mr.  Madison,  the 


448  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1818. 

war  against  Great  Britain.  When  the  presidential  con- 
test was  decided  against  Mr.  Clinton,  it,  by  no  means, 
diminished  my  zeal  for  the  vigorous  prosecution  of  the 
war,  or  my  ardor  in  support  of  the  democratic  party  in 
the  state  and  nation.  This,  the  little  circle  of  my  ac- 
quaintance who  are  now  in  life,  well  know.  I  was  dis- 
satisfied and  disgusted  with  the  conduct  of  Mr.  Clinton  on 
account  of  his  opposition  to  the  election  of  Gov.  Tomp- 
kins in  1813;  and,  for  a  time,  I  felt  that  he  had  forfeited 
the  confidence  of  the  democratic  party.  After  the  peace, 
and  in  the  summer  of  1815,  when  the  principal  causes  of 
the  controversy  between  the  two  great  parties  no  longer 
existed,  inasmuch  as  Mr.  Clinton  manifested  a  disposition 
again  to  act  with  the  democratic  party,  I  was,  I  confess, 
desirous  that  he  should  be  restored  to  their  confidence,  in 
order  that  the  state  might  avail  itself  of  his  talents  and 
services,  as  well  as  from  personal  respect  and  friendship 
for  him.  With  these  impressions,  I  did  what  I  could  to 
produce  a  state  of  feeling,  in  the  minds  of  those  republi- 
cans with  whom  I  communicated,  favorable  to  the  resto- 
ration of  Mr.  Clinton,  and  to  his  support  as  governor  of 
the  state,  and  I  felt  thankful  to  Judge  Spencer  for  his 
great  and  successful  efforW  to  produce  the  same  result. 
But  it  was  entirely  contrary  to  my  wishes,  and  at  war 
with  my  judgment,  to  form  any  connection  with  the  fede- 
ralists, as  a  party.  Not  that  I  desired  to  persecute  or 
even  proscribe  them.  I  hailed  the  era  of  good  feeling 
which  they  announced,asadding,  as  well  to  the  reputation 
of  the  country,  as  the  happiness  arising  from  social  inter- 
course, and  I  hoped  the  time  would  soon  arrive  when  the 
state,  in  accordance  with  the  feelings  of  the  republican 
party,  could  avail  itself  of  the  official  services  of  individual 
federalists.  At  the  period  of  which  I  am  speaking,  when 
I  first  became  a  member  of  the  senate,  I  was  entirely  igno- 
rant of  what  we  call  New- York  politics.     For  Governor 


1818.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  449 

Tompkins  I  had  great  respect.  Mr.  Van  Buren,  Mr. 
Young,  and  Mr.  Skinner,  I  had  long  known,  and  highly 
esteemed.  True,  they  had  differed  in  opinion  with  me, 
respecting  the  propriety  of  selecting  Mr.  Clinton  as  the 
gubernatorial  candidate;  but  what  was  that  1  They  had 
quite  as  good  a  right  to  their  opinions  as  I  had  to  mine, 
and  might,  very  probably,  be  right,  and  I  wrong.  It  was 
a  difference  of  opinion  about  the  merits  of  an  individual, 
not  a  difference  of  principle  in  relation  to  measures.  The 
circumstance  of  this  trifling  difference  produced,  in  my 
mind,  no  anxiety.  I  commenced  acting  with  them  with 
feelings  the  most  cordial.  My  determination  was  to  give 
Mr.  Clinton  a  fair  and  honest  support,  in  all  measures 
which  my  judgment  did  not  condemn,  and  if,  at  the  end 
of  his  term,  it  should  appear  that  his  services  were  not 
acceptable  to  the  majority  of  the  republican  party,  then  to 
select  another  man  for  governor;  and,  as  he  had  been 
nominated  and  elected  in  pursuance  of  the  usages  of  the 
republican  party,  as  governor  of  the  state,  I  supposed  such 
were  the  views  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  and  those  who  had 
acted  with  him  in  opposing  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Clinton. 
A  very  few  days  residence  in  Albany,  and  attendance  in 
the  senate,  convinced  me  of  my  error.  I  found,  on  one 
hand,  that  the  governor  was  cold,  if  not  vindictive,  to- 
wards Mr.  Van  Buren  and  others,  who  had  opposed  his 
elevation,  and  on  the  other,  a  determination  to  excite  pre- 
judices and  jealousies  against  the  governor,  to  render  him 
unpopular  with  the  republican  members  of  the  legislature, 
to  embarrass  him  in  the  discharge  of  his  executive  duties, 
and  thwart  him  in  his  measures. 

The  governor,  in  his  first  speech,  presented  a  very  clear 
and  able  view  of  the  financial  condition  of  the  state;  he 
recommended  several  important  improvements  in  our  mu- 
nicipal laws,  among  which  was  the  abolition  of  the  divi- 
sion of  the  stale  into  districts,  for  the  purpose  of  criminal 

29 


450  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1818. 

prosecutions,  and  the  appointment  of  an  attorney  for  the 
people  in  each  district;  and  he  advised,  in  lieu  of  this 
system,  the  appointment  of  an  attorney  for  the  people  in 
each  county.  He  suggested  other  measures  of  judicial 
reform,  and  he  eulogized  the  canal  policy,  and  gave  a 
very  flattering  account  of  the  progress  already  made  in  the 
construction  of  the  canals.  The  speech  was  well  received 
by  the  public  and  generally  approved. 

The  members  of  the  assembly  from  the  city  of  New- 
York  were  from  the  hot  bed  of  Tammany  Hall.  All  of 
them,  with  the  single  exception  of  Cadwallader  D.  Golden, 
were  open  and  bitter  in  their  denunciations  of  the  gover- 
nor, and  the  system  of  internal  improvements,  at  the  head 
of  which  he  stood,  and  with  which  he  v/as  identified. 
They  predicted,  with  confidence,  the  utter  failure  of  the 
system,  and  with  it,  the  serious  embarrasment  and  dis- 
grace, if  not  the  ruin  of  the  state.  They  claimed  that 
the  reputation  of  Mr.  Clinton  was  staked  on  the  fate 
of  this  system,  and  they  professed  their  willingness  to 
abide  the  result.  The  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton  did  not 
hesitate  to  join  in  the  issue  which  they  tendered.  The 
principal  and  most  zealous  members  of  the  New-York 
delegation,  were  Ogden  Edwards,  son  of  the  celebrated 
Pierpont  Edwards,  and  now  a  judge  of  the  first  circuit, 
Peter  Sharpe  and  Michael  Ulshoeffer.  In  their  train  fol- 
lowed Isaac  Pierson,  Henry  Meigs  and  Clarkson  Crolius, 
also  from  New-York,  and,  I  regret  to  add,  that  Gen.Erastus 
Root,  then  likewise  a  member  from  Delaware,  was  equally 
bitter  in  his  denunciations  against  the  governor  and  the 
canal  policy. 

I  have  said  the  New-York  members  emanated  from 
Tammany  Hall.  There  was  an  order  of  the  Tammany 
Society  who  wore  in  their  hats  as  an  insignia,  on  certain 
occasions,  a  portion  of  the  tail  of  the  deer.  They  were  a 
leading  order,  and  from  this  circumstance  the  friends  of 


1818.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  451 

Mr.  Clinton  gave  those  who  adopted  the  views  of  the 
members  of  the  Tammany  Society,  in  relation  to  him,  the 
name  of  Bucktails;  which  name  was  eventually  applied 
to  their  friends  and  supporters  in  the  country.  Hence, 
the  party  opposed  to  the  administration  of  Mr.  Clinton, 
were,  for  a  long  time,  called  the  Bucktail  Party. 

When  the  senate  came  together,  the  members  of  it,  in 
respect  to  their  political  views,  may  be  divided  into  four 
classes.  The  first,  and  most  numerous  class,  were  deter- 
mined, at  any  rate,  to  get  rid  of  Mr.  Clintonj  the  second, 
were  equally  determined  to  support  himj  the  third,  were 
wavering  in  their  opinions  and  views;  the  fourth,  were 
federalists. 

The  first  class  consisted  of — Van  Buren,  Livingston, 
Skinner,  Young,  Cantine,  Bowne,  Barnum,  Crosby,  Dit- 
mis,  Knox,  Dayton,  Ogden  and  Seymour — thirteen.  The 
second  class — Bates,  Hart,  Hammond,  Lounsbury,  J.  I. 
Prendergast,  Jed.  Prendergast  and  Ross — seven.  The 
third  class — Yates,  Noyes,  Swart,  Wilson,  Bicknell,  Swift 
and  Mallory — seven.  The  fourth  class — Van  Vechten, 
Tibbits,  Allen,  Hascal  and  Frey — five. 

At  the  first  glance  it  will  be  perceived,  that  of  the 
twenty-seven  republican  members  of  the  senate,  the  bal- 
ance, not  only  of  numbers,  but  of  talent,  was  decidedly  in 
favor  of  the  Bucktails.  Of  the  unsettled  and  doubtful 
members  in  the  third  class,  with  the  exception  of  Mr. 
Yates,  who  was  a  sound  minded  and  respectable  lawyer, 
there  was  not  an  individual  who  claimed  much  talents  as 
a  legislator.  In  the  second  class  there  was  an  almost 
equal  defect  of  talent,  and  more  especially  of  party  tact 
and  address.  Mr.  Bates  was  a  shrewd,  sensible  yankee. 
As  a  county  politician,  he  undoubtedly  possessed  some 
efficiency;  but  his  mind  had  never  been  enlarged  and  cul- 
tivated by  education,  and  he  was  narrow  and  selfish  in  his 
views  and  principles  of  action.     He  was  bitterly  hostile 


452  POLITTCAl      HISTORY  [1818. 

to  Mr.  Van  Buren,  for  what  particular  cause  I  know  not; 
and  was  much  governed,  in  his  political  action,  by  the 
impulses  of  feeling,  and  of  personal  likings  and  dislikings. 
Mr.  Hart  was  an  enterprising  country  merchant  from 
Oneida  county,  and  had  acquired  a  considerable  estate. 
He  was  ardent  in  his  feelings,  warm  in  his  friendships, 
and  much  influenced  by  his  pecuniary  interests.  He  was 
an  ardent  supporter  of  the  canal  policy,  and  therefore  a 
warm  friend  to  the  governor.  His  prejudices  against  the 
federalists  were  deep  and  bitter,  and  he  was  equally  hos- 
tile against  Mr.  Van  Buren.  He  was,  in  my  judgment, 
quite  incapable  of  forming  any  system  of  political  action 
on  a  basis  broad  enough  to  lead  to  the  formation,  or  even 
to  secure  the  preservation  of  a  party.  His  great  anxiety 
appeared  to  be,  to  guard  and  promote  the  interest  of  the 
Utica  Bank,  in  which  he  was  a  large  stockholder,  and  to 
provide  for  the  completion  of  the  Erie  canal.  As  a  party 
man  he  acted  without  system,  and  sometimes  apparently 
without  any  rational  motive.* 

*  As  an  evidence  of  Mr.  Hart's  utter  want  of  political  tact,  as  well  an  of  his 
rashness  as  a  legislator,  I  give  the  following  case  : — 

William  L.  Stoke,  now,  and  for  a  long  time  heretofore,  the  distinguished  and 
able  editor  of  the  Commercial  Advertiser  of  New-York,  was  then  the  conductor 
of  the  Albany  Daily  Advertiser,  a  leading  federal  paper.  It  was  known  to  us  all, 
that  Col  Stone,  although  a  federalist,  was  a  decided  friend  to  Gov.  Clinton,  and 
was  determined,  when  he  could  do  so  with  effect,  to  devote  his  paper  to  his  sup- 
port. There  was,  at  that  lime,  as  there  had  been  before  and  has  since  been,  many 
persons  in  attendance  on  the  legislature  as  agents  to  procure  charters  for  bank- 
ing and  other  companies.  Mr.  Sharpe,  of  New- York,  and  several  other  Bucktail 
members,  took  it  into  their  heads  to  deliver  several  severe  philippics  against  the 
lobby,  expressing  their  suspicions  that  these  agents  would  attempt  to  corrupt  the 
members  of  the  legislature.  Mr.  James  O.  Morse,  a  respectable  lawyer  from  Ot- 
sego county,  since  first  judge  of  that  county,  a  keen,  sarcastic  writer,  and  who 
himself  occasionally  visited  Albany  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  a  charter  for  the 
Central  Bank,  wrote  a  communication  tending  to  ridicule  Mr.  Sharpe  and  others, 
on  account  of  the  apprehensions  they  affected  to  entertain  of  the  danger  of  bribery 
and  corruption  by  the  lobby.  Mr.  Morse,  among  other  things,  proposed,  in  his 
communication,  that  a  wall  should  be  erected  around  the  capitol,  so  strong  and 
high  as  to  secure  Mr.  Sharpe  and  his  friends  from  the  apprehended  danger  of  an 
attack  from  the  lobby.  This  article  appeared  in  Col.  Stone's  paper.  The  sugges- 
tion I  have  mentioned,  was  the  most  offensive  part  of  it. 

Col.  Stone  usually  attended  the  Senate  to  report  the  proceedings  of  that  body 


1818.]  OF    NEW-YOKK.  453 

The  two  Prendergasts  were  brothers,  and  both  bred 
physicians,  upright  and  good  men,  but  neither  of  them 
well  calculated  to  effect  much  in  a  legislative  body.  Of 
Mr.  Ross  I  have  formerly  spoken.  He  had,  for  many 
years,  followed  the  lead  of  Judge  Spencerj  had  floated 
along  with  the  republican  party,  and  when  all  his  political 
action,  in  the  legislature,  was  sustained  by  the  power  of  a 
great,  and  generally  a  triumphant  party,  he  seemed  to 
move  on  smoothly;  but  the  present  was  quite  a  new 
scene,  and  he  was  entirely  inadequate  to  act  the  part, 
which,  from  his  long  standing  in  the  legislature,  naturally 
devolved  upon  him.  Mr.  Lounsbury  was  an  highly  up- 
right and  worthy  practical  farmer,  a  man  of  sound  mind 
and  good  judgment,  but  incapable  of  acting  with  much 
effect  as  a  legislator  or  member  of  a  party. 

With  regard  to  myself,  it  is  scarcely  necessary  for  me 
to  say,  that  my  want  of  political  experience  and  a  knowl  • 
edge  of  the  character  and  motives  of  the  men  around  me; 
my  utter  defect  of  talent  in  extemporary  debate;  and  my 
want  of  confidence  in  myself,  rendered  me  almost,  if  not 
quite,  useless  to  the  party  with  whom  I  wished  to  act. 

Of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  who  stands  at  the  head  of  the  cata- 
logue of  the  first  class,  it  is  unnecessary  to  speak.     He 

for  his  own  paper.  Mr.  Hart  was  pleased  to  consider  this  good  natured  para- 
graph, intended  to  take  off  some  of  the  leading  Bucktails  of  the  assembly,  as  a 
contempt  of  the  senate,  and  forthwith  moved  a  resolution  that  William  L.  Stone 
be  excluded  from  the  bar  of  the  senate.  Mr.  H.  soon  found  that  such  a  resolution 
would  not  be  approved  by  the  senate,  and  therefore  requested  that  it  might  lay  on 
the  table;  but,  at  the  instance  of  Col.  Stone,  Mr.  P.  R.  Livingston,  soon  after- 
wards, highly  to  his  credit,  called  for  the  consideration  of  the  resolution,  and  Mr 
Stone,  though  he  declined  disclosing  the  name  of  the  author  of  this  treasonable 
article,  having  assured  the  president  of  the  senate  that  he  did  not  intend,  by  its 
publication,  to  treat  either  branch  of  the  legislature  disrespectfully,  it  was  unani- 
mously decided  that  no  further  proceedings  should  be  had  in  the  matter. 

Here,  was  a  causeless  attack  made  upon  a  respectable  newspaper  editor;  in 
principle  wrong,  because  its  tendency  was  to  abridge  the  liberty  of  the  press,  and 
also  to  convert  a  friend  into  an  enemy,  with  no  other  object  than  to  gratify  the 
personal  pique  of  the  mover.  Could  a  political  party  hope  to  sustain  itself, 
■whose  leaders  were  so  void  of  any  thing  like  policy,  so  inconsiderate,  and  so 
reckless  of  consequences. 


454  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [181S. 

had  then  been  four  years  a  leading  member  of  the  senate. 
His  splendid  talents,  and  great  political  tact,  are  too  well 
known  to  require  description. 

Mr.  Young's  character  is  now  well  known,  and  his 
great  talents  universally  admitted.  I  may,  however,  be 
allowed  to  say,  that  I  think  Mr.  Young  a  perfectly  honest 
man.  His  defect,  as  a  politician,  is,  that  he  is  too  vindic- 
tive* in  his  feelings  towards  his  opponents.  He  investi- 
gates a  question  ably,  and  he  arrives  at  his  conclusions 
logically,  clearly  and  honestly;  but  then,  if  you  still  resist 
the  conclusion  to  which  he  has  arrived,  he  is  too  apt  to 
pronounce,  in  effect,  that  you  are  either  a  fool  or  a  knave, 
and  he  honestly  believes  you  are  so.  The  reason  is,  that 
he  himself  thinks  he  sees  clearly,  and  knows  he  forms  his 
opinions  with  perfect  integrity.  The  necessary  result  is, 
that  he  doubts  either  the  sincerity  or  the  ability  of  the 
man  with  whom  he  differs.  He  does  not  suspect  the  cer- 
tainty of  the  correctness  of  his  own  judgment,  so  much  as 
all  men  ought,  and  he  does  not  make  allowance  enough 
for  the  weakness  and  imperfection  of  other  men.  Hence 
Mr.  Young,  though  an  honest  man  and  a  great  man,  can 
never  be  a  popular  man. 

Roger  Skinner  was  a  man  pleasing  in  his  address;  his 
talents  were  rather  of  the  persuasive  than  solid  kind,  and, 
as  a  companion,  he  was  quite  agreeable.  He  was  fond  of 
political  management,  and  rather  reckless  as  to  the  means 
he  employed  to  accomplish  his  ends.  He  was  said  to  be 
bitter  in  his  feelings  as  a  partizan.  If  such  was  the  fact, 
the  evidence  of  it  did  not  come  within  my  observation. 
I  thought  him  naturally  kind  and  obliging.  He  was,  un- 
doubtedly, very  bitter  in  his  feelings  against  Gov.  Clinton 
personally.  To  what  particular  cause  this  was  owing,  I 
was  never  informed.  Probably  the  governor  had  given 
him  offence  individually. 

•  See  Note  A.  vol.  2,  p.  639. 


1819.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  455 

Walter  Bowne  had  formerly  been  a  businessman,  and 
"was  now  a  man  of  wealth;  shrewd  and  sagacious  as  a 
partizan,  but  generally  courteous  in  his  manner.  He,  too, 
was  extremely  bitter  in  his  hostility  to  the  governor.  To 
me  it  seemed  strange  that  a  man  of  his  general  acquain- 
tance with  life,  and  with  public  men,  could  be  so  violent 
in  his  animosity  against  any  individual,  merely  because  he 
was  opposed  to  his  political  advancement. 

Peter  R.  Livingston  came  into  the  senate  with  all  the 
prejudices  of  his  family  against  the  Clintons.  Indeed, 
those  prejudices  seemed  to  be  all  concentrated  in  him. 
He  was  a  man  of  fine  fancy  and  great  declamatory  pow- 
ers. Few  men  could  address  a  popular  assembly  with 
more  effect  than  Mr.  Livingston.  His  usefulness,  as  a 
legislator,  was  impaired  by  a  lack  of  industry  and  labori- 
ous attention  to  the  details  of  business. 

Moses  I.  Cantine,  a  respectable  lawyer  from  Catskill, 
was  the  brother-in-law  of  Mr.  Van  Buren.  Frank,  gene- 
rous and  kind  in  his  social  intercourse,  no  man  could  per- 
sonally dislike  him.  Though  a  zealous  partizan,  the 
kindness  of  his  nature  rendered  him  incapable  of  bitter- 
ness.    His  talents,  if  not  great,  were  at  least  respectable. 

Henry  Seymour  was  a  country  merchant  from  the 
county  of  Onondaga.  He  was  a  well  bred  man,  and  very 
gentlemanly  in  his  deportment.  His  great  native  shrewd- 
ness and  sagacity  had  been  improved  and  highly  cultivated 
by  an  association  with  genteel  society.  As  a  politician, 
he  was  cautious  and  wary.  His  opponents  charged  him 
with  being  Jesuitical,  but  of  this  I  cannot  speak  from  my 
own  knowledge;  for  he  certainly  never  gave  me  any 
proofs  of  a  want  of  sincerity  and  candor.  I  do  not  think 
his  opposition  to  Gov.  Clinton  originated  from  personal 
motives.  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  the  apprehension 
that  Mr.  Clinton's  policy,  if  sustained,  would  endanger 


456  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1818. 

the  republican  party,  and  his  attachment  personally  to 
Mr.  Van  Buren,  controlled  him  in  his  political  action. 

Isaac  Ogden,  of  Delaware,  was  a  man  of  strong  and 
vigorous  intellect,  and  of  great  decision  of  character.  He, 
too,  for  some  cause  unknown  to  me,  seemed  personally 
vindictive  against  the  governor. 

The  residue  of  the  gentlemen  of  the  first  class  were 
mere  voters  who  always  followed  their  file  leaders. 

With  respect  to  the  federalists,  who  constituted  the 
fourth  class,  I  remark  briefly  that  Messrs.  Allen,  Hascal 
and  Frey  were  upright,  honest,  and  honorable  men.  They 
were  disposed  to  give  Mr.  Clinton's  administration  an 
honest  and  honorable  support,  because  they  thought  it 
tended  to  advance  the  prosperity  of  the  state.  Mr.  Allen 
was  an  excellent  lawyer;  and  a  more  pure  and  scrupulously 
honest  man  than  Ralph  Hascal,  never  lived. 

That  Mr.  George  Tibbits  was  a  man  of  profound  sa- 
gacity, is  well  known.  His  knowledge,  acquired  during 
a  long  and  successful  life  devoted  to  mercantile,  commer- 
cial and  banking  business,  rendered  him  an  useful  member 
of  the  senate;  but  his  habits  of  traffic,  which  he  had  ac- 
quired in  business,  or  some  other  cause,  rendered  him 
inclined  to  trade^  as  a  politician.  He  was  desirous  of 
receiving  a  "  consideration  "  for  all  his  political  acts.  He 
considered  the  prospects  of  the  federal  party  to  be  pros- 
trated, and  he  was,  therefore,  disposed  to  make  the  most 
of  his  present  position,  and  was  quite  indifferent  whether 
it  was  the  Clintonians  or  Bucktails  with  whom  he  nego- 
tiated.    [See  JYote  A.  Vol.  2.  p.  541.] 

Of  the  talents  of  Abraham  Van  Vechten  I  need  not 
speak.  They  are  universally  admitted  to  be  great.  Asa 
legislator,  he  possessed  one  characteristic  which  proved 
him  to  be  a  genuine  descendant  and  true  representative  of 
the  Low  Dutch.  He  had  an  instinctive  horror  at  all  inno- 
vations, and  at  every  thing  which  w^as  new.     What  never 


1818.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  457 

had  been  done,  he  seemed  to  think  ought  never  to  be  done. 
In  politics  he  was  the  very  impersonation  of  ancient  fede- 
ralism. He  could  not  look  on  any  man  with  favor,  who, 
in  the  good  times  of  John  Jay,  was  in  the  ranks  of  the 
opposition,  or  who  had  subsequently  attached  himself  to 
the  party  which  opposed  that  great  and  good  man.  He 
looked  upon  De  Witt  Clinton,  Ambrose  Spencer,  D.  D. 
Tompkins,  Smith  Thompson  and  Martin  Van  Buren  as  in 
pari  delicto,  and  seemed  like  Queen  Margaret,  in  the  play 
of  Richard  the  Third,  to  rejoice  when  one  was  destroyed 
by  the  other. 

I  must  be  permitted  to  add,  that  those  who  knew  Mr. 
Van  Vechten  alleged,  and  I  believe  with  truth,  that  with 
all  his  great  qualities,  he  was,  notwithstanding,  a  cunning 
man,  and  was  occasionally  addicted  to  intrigue;  and  that 
he  frequently  attempted,  by  plotting,  to  circumvent  rivals 
among  his  own  political  friends,  as  well  as  to  thwart  the 
views  of  his  opponents. 

Mr.  Van  Buren,  of  course,  felt  a  deep  interest  in  the 
choice  of  the  council  of  appointment.  His  object  would 
not  be  accomplished  if  men  were  placed  in  the  council,  a 
majority  of  whom  were  decidedly  hostile  to  the  governor. 
In  that  case  the  public  would  impute  all  the  errors  which 
might  be  committed,  to  the  council,  and  judge  of  the  ex- 
ecutive by  his  speeches.  Nor  was  he  willing  that  Mr. 
Clinton  should  have  a  council  which  would  accord  with 
him  in  all  his  views,  and  be  subservient  to  his  wishes. 
It  would,  he  thought,  be  more  desirable  to  form  a  council 
which  the  governor  could  not  control,  but  for  whose  acts 
the  public  would  hold  him  responsible.  In  other  words, 
Mr.  Van  Buren  wished  to  create  a  council  which  should 
be  nominally  Clintonian,  but  which,  at  the  same  time, 
should  be  really  hostile  to  the  governor.  Partly  by  man- 
agement, and  partly  by  accident,  a  council,  of  the  charac- 
ter last  described,  was  actually  chosen. 


458  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1818. 

Before  the  legislature  met,  it  was  intimated  to  me  that 
it  was  desired  that  I  should  be  a  member  of  the  council; 
but  I  peremptorily  declined.  I  knew  enough  then  of  the 
political  history  of  the  state,  to  be  convinced  that  the  sta- 
tion was  one  which  generally  incurred  much  odium.  I 
felt  that  I  was  ignorant  of  the  real  standing  and  character 
of  most  of  the  active  political  men  in  the  state,  and  that, 
before  attempting  to  occupy  a  position  which  would  call 
attention  to  me,  it  would  be  desirable  that  I  should  ac- 
quire some  character  for  usefulness  as  a  legislator.  But 
soon  after  I  arrived  in  Albany,  I  found  that  there  was  an 
almost  universal  inclination,  on  the  part  of  the  governor's 
friends,  that  I  should  be  in  the  council;  but  from  an  inter- 
terview  between  Wm.  C.  Bouck,  a  member  of  the  assem- 
bly from  Schoharie,  and  myself,  which  I  perceived  was 
caused  by  Mr.  Van  Buren,  I  became  satisfied  that  he  pre- 
ferred some  other  senator  from  the  middle  district;  al- 
though Mr.  Bouck  did  not  even  mention  his  name.  In  a 
short  time,  however,  I  ascertained  that  I  could  not  refuse 
without  offending  many  of  my  best  friends,  and  I  therefore 
consented. 

The  members  of  the  council  were,  at  that  time,  desig- 
nated by  a  caucus  of  the  republican  members  of  assembly 
from  each  senatorial  district.  In  the  southern  district, 
which  was  represented  in  the  assembly  almost  wholly 
by  Bucktails,  Peter  R.  Livingston  was  nominated,  I  be- 
lieve, without  opposition;  and  in  the  eastern,  Henry  Yates, 
who  was  the  only  professed  republican  Clintonian  from 
that  district,  was  selected. 

In  the  western  district  a  large  majority  of  the  republi- 
can members  were  sincere  friends  of  the  governor,  and 
desired  that  a  council  of  appointment  should  be  formed 
who  would  pursue  all  reasonable  measures  to  sustain  him; 
but,  unfortunately,  the  two  most  prominent  Clintonian 
senators  from  that  district,  Mr.  Bates  and  Mr.  Hart,  were 


1S18.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  459 

candidates  for  the  nomination.  Both  were  ardent,  and 
both  were  extremely  imprudent,  and  reckless  of  the  conse- 
quences which  might  result  to  the  state  administration 
from  their  collisions.  I  speak  from  conjecture,  but  I  do 
not  doubt  the  fact,  that  the  friends  and  agents  of  Mr.  Van 
Buren  did  what  they  could  to  widen  the  breach,  and 
heighten  the  contest  between  Bates  and  Hart. 

There  were  a  few  Bucktail  members  of  assembly  from 
the  western  district.  These  gentlemen,  in  the  caucus 
held  by  the  members  from  that  district,  supported  Henry 
Seymour,  and  some,  if  not  all,  the  friends  of  Bates,  out  of 
mere  resentment  against  Hart  and  the  Utica  Bank,  which, 
it  was  said,  had  been  busy  in  this  affair,  voted  for  Seymour, 
and  he  was  nominated.  Messrs.  Livingston,  Yates,  Sey- 
mour, and  myself,  were  the  next  day  chosen,  in  pursuance 
of  the  decrees  of  these  sub-caucussers.* 

I  have  reason  to  believe  that  it  had  been  given  out,  by 
some  of  the  Bucktail  leaders,  that,  in  case  Mr.  Clinton 
shDuld  not  be  the  next  republican  candidate,  Judge  Yates 
would  be  selected,  and  that  those  outgivings  had  been 
communicated  to  Mr.  Henry  Yates,  who  was  a  brother  of 
the  judge.  It  is  proper  to  add,  however,  that  I  do  not 
know  the  fact,  and  state  it  as  conjecture  merely.  Be  that 
as  it  may,  subsequent  events  proved  that  Mr.  Yates  be- 
came opposed  to  Mr.  Clinton.  Before  I  go  further,  it  is 
my  duty  to  say,  and  I  take  pleasure  in  saying  it,  that 
Henry  Yates  was  strictly  an  honest  and  honorable  man. 
In  all  my  communications  with  him  I  never  found  him 
guilty  of  the  least  evasion  or  prevarication.  But,  never- 
theless, his  mind  may  have  been  biased  when  he  himself 
was  not  aware  of  it. 


*  It  was  stated  to  me  by  the  late  Judge  W.  P.Van  Ness,  that  the  moment  the 
council  was  chosen,  Mr.  Van  Buren  wrote  to  his  friend  in  Columbia  county,  the 
following  brief  letter  : — 

"All  is  safe.    Seymour  I  Seymour  I  Seymour!" 


460  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1818. 

Here,  then,  was  a  council  organized,  consisting  of  Mr. 
Livingston,  who  was  open  and  virulent  in  his  opposition; 
of  Mr.  Seymour,  who  was  equally  resolved  in  his  hostility, 
but  wary,  smooth,  and  apparently  moderate  in  his  action; 
and  Mr.  Yates,  a  professed  Clintonian,  but,  undoubtedly, 
considerably  influenced  by  his  brother,  the  judge,  now 
openly  in  the  opposition;  Mr.  Henry  Yates  unreservedly 
declaring  himself  opposed  to  Judge  Spencer,  or  what  he 
called  the  dictation  of  Mr.  Spencer. 

Immediately  after  the  council  was  chosen  and  before  its 
first  meeting,  Mr.  Yates  stated  to  me  that  John  Van 
Ness  Yates,  who  was  his  distant  relative,  had  been  un- 
justly removed  through  the  influence  of  Judge  Spencer, 
from  the  office  of  recorder  of  Albany;  that  he  wished 
forthwith  to  correct  the  error  by  the  removal  of  Mr. 
Parker,  and  re-appointment  of  Mr.  Yates;  that  Mr.  Liv- 
ingston would  vote  with  him  on  that  question,  but  Mr- 
Seymour  would  not,  as  he  had  committed  himself  to 
vote  against  all  removals  except  for  official  misconduct. 
To  this  I  replied,  that  although  the  office  was  of  little 
importance,  and  although  I  was  satisfied  that  the  removal 
of  the  late  incumbent  was  wrong,  the  case  was  peculiar, 
and  I  was  not  prepared  to  act  in  accordance  with  his 
request — that  the  agency  Judge  Spencer  had  had  in  the 
removal  of  Mr.  Yates,  and  the  connection  existing  be- 
tween him  and  Mr.  Parker,  would  render  the  removal 
of  the  latter  a  declaration  of  war  against  the  Judge, 
•vv'hich  considering  the  very  great  obligations  he  had  con- 
ferred on  Mr.  Clinton  and  his  friends,  by  his  efficient 
and  successful  efforts  in  procuring  his  nomination,  would 
be  an  act  not  only  unjust,  but  would  stamp  with  the 
vilest  ingratitude,  the  governor  and  all  those  who  pro- 
fessed to  be  his  friends.  This  reply  was  not  at  all 
satisfactory  to  Mr.  Yates,  and  in  various  conversations 
with  me  he  finally   intimated    that   unless   this  outrage 


1S18.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  461 

was  repaired,  he  could  not  lend  his  aid  in  the  votes  he 
should  give  in  the  council  to  the  friends  of  Mr.  Clin- 
ton. Eventually  I  assured  Mr.  Y.  that  although  I  could 
not  and  would  not  vote  for  the  removal  of  Parker-,  before 
the  council  was  dissolved,  I  would  aid  him  with  my  vote 
in  making  some  suitable  provison  for  his  friendj  and 
with  this  assurance  he  was  satisfied.  I  mention  this  lit- 
tle incident,  to  show  by  what  means  the  current  of  the 
state  patronage,  while  it  was  distributed  by  the  council 
of  appointment,  was  directed  or  changed.  I  was  wrong. 
I  should  have  declined  any  negotiation,  and  disclaimed 
all  responsiblity  in  respect  to  the  doings  of  a  majority 
of  the  council.  That  course  would  have  relieved  me 
from  much  anxiety  and  vexation,  and  in  the  end  would 
have  been  better  for  Mr.  Clinton. 

I  had  been  but  a  few  days  in  the  senate,  before  I 
perceived  that  although  there  was  a  nominal  majority 
in  that  body  favorable  to  the  governor,  the  real  majo- 
rity was  against  him,  and  I  could  not  but  forsee  that 
the  consequence  would  be,  to  the  executive,  seriously 
embarrassing.  I  communicated  my  views  to  the  govern- 
or, which  he  affected  to  treat  with  great  indifference,  and 
urged  that  I  was  mistaken  in  the  canvass  I  had  made.  I 
further  stated  to  him  that  the  preponderance  of  talent 
among  the  republicans  was  decidedly  unfavorable  to  him, 
and  that  he  had  not  a  single  friend  there  who  was  suita- 
ble for  the  leader  of  a  party.  Shortly  afterwards  I  had 
reason  to  suspect  that  jealousies  were  taking  root  between 
Mr.  Van  Buren  and  Col.  Young;  and  I  thought  that 
circumstance  afforded  a  favorable  opportunity  to  make 
an  effort  to  gain  one  of  them;  and  as  Col.  Young  was 
identified  Avith  the  governor  in  the  canal  policy,  and  as 
canal  commissioner,  was  his  colleague,  it  struck  me  that 
he  would  be  the  most  natural  ally.  Senator  Hart  was, 
as  he  assured  me,  in  habits  of  familiar  intercourse  with 


462  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1818. 

Col.  Y,,  and  I  requested  him  to  ascertain  whether  a 
good  and  friendly  communicaion  could  not  be  established 
between  the  governor  and  Mr.  Young.  From  Mr.  Hart 
1  soon  learned  that  Col.  Young  did  not  object  to  act 
with  Mr.  Clinton  if  he  could  be  satisfied  that  the  go- 
vernor would  pursue  a  republican  course;  and  if  some 
trifling  personal  difficulties  could  be  explained  and  re- 
moved. I  forthwith  called  on  Mr.  Clinton  and  commu- 
nicated to  him  these  facts,  but  I  found  him  indifferent, 
and  disinclined  to  aid  in  carrying  into  eff'ect  the  pro- 
ject I  had  so  much  at  heart,  and  which  I  deemed  highly 
important. 

From  that  moment  my  confidence  in  Gov.  Clinton,  as 
a  good  practical  politician,  in  a  popular  government,  was 
gone.  I  have  never  regained  it.  However  noble  and 
magnificent  were  his  ends,  he  failed  in  providing  the 
means  for  their  accomplishment. 

Not  many  days  passed  before  any  difficulties  which 
might  have  existed  between  Mr.  Van  Buren  and  Mr. 
Young,  were  removed,  and  a  fixed,  well  compacted  and 
organized  majority  against  the  governor  was  formed  in 
the  senate.  In  the  progress  of  the  session,  procoedings 
were  had,  which  exhibited  that  majority  in  such  a  man- 
ner as  to  remove  all  doubt.  In  proof  of  this  position, 
t  give  the  following  case: 

In  the  western  district,  at  the  election  in  April,  1817, 
two  senators  were  to  be  chosen;  one  to  supply  the  place 
of  a  deceased  senator  from  that  district,  who  in  1816 
died,  one  year  before  the  expiration  of  his  term,  and  the 
other  for  the  term  of  four  years.  Doct.  Jediah  Pren- 
dergast  and  Isaac  Wilson  were  nominated,  and  at  the  time 
of  the  nomination  it  was  understood  that  Prendergast 
was  the  candidate  for  the  iour  years  term  and  Wilson 
for  the  one  year.  By  law,  in  a  case  like  this,  the  can- 
didate  who   had   the  greatest  number  of  votes  was  de- 


1818.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  463 

clared  elected  for  the  longest  term.  A  dispute  arose  be- 
tween those  candidates,  and  the  question  was,  which  of 
them  was  entitled  to  a  seat  for  the  four  years.  The 
following  were  the  undisputed  facts  as  reported  by  Mr. 
Frey,  chairman  of  the  committee  of  elections. 

There  were  given  at  the  election,  for  Isaac  Wilson 
fifteen  thousand  and  nine  votes.  For  Jediah  Prendergast, 
fourteen  thousand  nine  hundred  and  eighty-five,  and  for 
Jedediah  Prendergast,  ninety-one,  and  Jed.  Prendergast 
ten  votes.  The  canvassers  delivered  the  certificate  for 
four  years,  to  Mr.  Wilson.  It  was  proved  by  the  oath 
of  forty-two  electors,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  committee, 
that  they  had  voted  for  Jedediah  Prendergast,  intending 
Jediah  Prendergast.  These  forty-two  votes,  independent 
of  the  remaining  fifty-nine,  would  have  given  Doct. 
Prendergast  a  majority  of  eighteen  over  Wilson.  The 
committee  further  reported  that  it  was  not  alleged  by  Mr. 
Wilson  that  there  was  any  man  in  the  district  who  bore 
the  name  of  Jedediah  Prendergast.  The  committee  there- 
fore reported  that  Mr.  Prendergast  was  entitled  to  a 
seat  for  the  term  of  four  years.  It  would  seem  to  me 
that  no  man  capable  in  the  plainest  cases  of  distinguish- 
ing between  right  and  wrong,  could  differ  with  the  com- 
mittee in  the  conclusions  to  which  they  arrived.  But 
there  was  one  fact  in  the  case  which  the  committee  did 
not  report,  and  that  was,  that  Prendergast  was  a  sup- 
porter, and  Wilson,  by  this  time  had  become  an  oppo- 
nent, of  the  governor. 

Col.  Young,  whom  I  have  said,  and  again  repeat,  is 
an  honest  man,  (but  what  mind  is  proof  against  the 
bias  created  by  political  prejudice  and  interest,)  grave- 
ly made  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  right  of  Wilson  to 
the  seat  for  four  years.  He  produced  the  &i6/c,  and  in 
it  found  both  the  names  of  Jedediah  and  Jediah,  and 
thence  inferred  that  he  had  sustained  the  position  for  which 


464  POLITICAL    HISTOKY  [1818. 

he  contended!  It  would  have  been  more  creditable  to 
him  and  his  friends  to  have  voted  without  arguing. 
The  four  years  seat  w^as  assigned  to  Mr.  Wilson,  by  a 
vote  of  thirteen  to  eleven. 

As  an  act  of  justice  to  the  minority,  I  give  the  names 
of  those  who  voted: 

For  Wilson — Barnum,  Cantine,  Crosby,  Dayton,  Dit- 
mis,  Knox,  Livington,  Ogden,  Seymour,  Skinner,  Van 
Buren,  Yates,*  Young, — thirteen. 

For  Prendergast — Bates,  Bowne,  Frey,  Hammond, 
Hascal,  Lounsbury,  Noyes,  Ross,  Swart,  Tibbits,  Van 
Vechten — el  even . 

The  two  Prendergasts  and  Wilson  did  not  vote.  The 
absentees  were  Allen,  Swift,  Hart,  Mallory  and  Bicknel. 
It  will  be  seen,  with  the  exception  of  Mr.  Bowne,  (an 
exception  highly  honorable  to  him,)  that  it  was  a  com- 
plete party  vote.  From  Mr.  Van  Buren  and  Col.  Young, 
at  any  rate  better  things  ought  to  have  been  anticipated. 
Doct.  Prendergast  from  that  day  became  and  was  a 
zealous  Bucktail!  I  leave  it  to  the  philosophical  inquirer 
into  the  action  of  the  human  mind  to  account  for  his 
conversion. 

The  procedings  of  the  council  were,  as  may  well  be 
anticipated,  when  the  materials  of  which  it  was  com- 
posed are  considered,  bungling,  awkward  and  inconsis- 
tent. In  almost  all  cases  my  individual  views  were 
thwarted.  Something  was  always  proposed  by  one  of 
the  members  with  whom  I  actedj  which  though  perhaps, 
not  absolutely  bad,  was  by  no  means  so  good  in  my 
judgment,  as  might  have  been  done.  I  of  course  yield- 
ed, to  prevent  something  worse.  I  do  not  recollect  of 
but  one  prominent  appointment  which  I  proposed,  which 
was  made;  and  that  was  the  appointment  of  C,  D.  Col- 
den  mayor  of  New-York.     The  members  from  the  city 

*  Which  way  Mr.  Yates  leaned  may  be  learned  from  this  rot*. 


1818.1  0^    NEW-YORK  465 

had  recommended  Col.  Paulding,  and  he  was  of  course 
supported  by  Messrs.  Livingston  and  Seymour.  The 
governor  was  in  favor  of  Sylvanus  Miller.  I  first  pro- 
posed Mr.  Golden  to  Mr.  Yates,  who  was  generally  in- 
clined to  cross  the  views  of  the  governor,  though  he 
wished  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  opposition,  or  rather  he 
declined  (for  he  was  incapable  of  deception,)  placing 
himself  in  an  attitude  of  direct  hostility  to  the  governor. 
The  policy,  or  perhaps  I  ought  to  say  feelings  of  Mr. 
Yates,  placed  Gov.  Clinton  in  the  precise  condition  which 
Mr.  Van  Buren  desired.  He  was  so  situated  as  in  the 
view  of  his  friends  and  the  public,  to  be  held  responsi- 
ble for  all  the  appointments,  many  of  which  were  not 
hisj  but  submitted  to  by  him  to  avoid  a  worse  course 
by  the  council.  But  I  am  wandering  from  my  subject. 
I  informed  Mr.  Yates  that  the  Governor  desired  the 
appointment  of  Mr.  Miller,  upon  which  he  readily  com- 
mitted himself  in  favor  of  Colden.  I  went  immediately 
into  the  council  and  nominated  Colden.  As  I  anticipa- 
ted, either  Livingston  or  Seymour  nominated  Paulding, 
which  reduced  the  governor  to  the  necessity  of  deciding 
between  the  two.  He  of  course  voted  for  Colden,  and 
he  was  appointed. 

Gov.  Clinton  like  Gov.  Lewis,  was  extremely  timid 
in  relation  to  the  appointment  of  federalists.  Mr.  Yates 
was  also  averse  to  the  appointment  of  any  individuals 
belonging  to  that  class  of  politicians.  I  give  one  in- 
stance. I  had  accidentally  become  acquainted  with  John 
C.  Hamilton,  son  of  the  celebrated  General  Hamilton, 
and  the  talented  author  of  his  biography  now  being  pub- 
lished. I  ascertained  that  the  little  office  of  commissioner 
of  deeds  would  be  agreeable  to  him,  and  proposed  his  ap- 
pointment to  that  office,  to  the  governor;  as  well  in  testi- 
mony of  respect  to  the  memory  of  one  of  the  greatest  men 

that  ever  lived  in  this  country,  as  a  mark  of  attention  to  a 

30 


466  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1818. 

young  man  of  fair  character  and  promising  taientsj  and 
it  was  with  some  difficulty  that  I  procured  this  petty  ap- 
pointment, because  John  C.  Hamilton  was  supposed  to  be 
a  federalist. 

The  old  friends  of  the  governor  in  New- York,  who  had 
been  ejected  from  office  because  of  their  attachment  to 
Clinton,  such  as  P.  C.  Van  Wyck,  Garrit  Gilbert  and 
others,  who  claimed  that  provision  should  be  made  for 
them,  were  extremely  pressing,  in  urging  the  removal  of 
the  bucktail  incumbents  to  make  place  for  them. 

For  myself,  I  considered  the  New-York  bucktails  as 
having  formed  an  organized  opposition  to  the  state  ad 
ministration,  and  as  political  opponents  to  the  democratic 
party  in  the  state,  which  I  insisted  was  represented  by 
Gov.  Clinton  astheirchiefj  and  according  to  the  common 
law  of  party,  as  then  established,  I  thought  we  had  the 
right,  and  that  it  was  our  duty  to  make  war  on  them,  as 
a  faction,  who,  like  the  Burr  and  Lewis  faction,  were  op- 
posed to  the  great  republican  party  in  the  state.  But  I 
should  have  preferred  some  other  appointments  than  those 
which  were  recommended  by  the  governor.  They  con- 
sisted of  a  little  handful  of  old  friends,  who,  from  some 
cause,  it  may  be,  without  any  fault  of  theirs,  had  become 
odious  to  the  great  mass  of  community,  whether,  consist- 
ing of  federalists  or  democrats.  I  should  have  preferred 
to  have  taken  now  and  then  a  federalist  of  influence  and 
personal  popularity,  and  to  have  christened  him  a  demo- 
crat, and  to  have  gone  into  the  ranks  of  the  bucktails  and 
selected  some  of  them.,  but  precisely  the  men  whom  the 
leaders  of  the  faction  disliked,  as  was  done  in  the  case  of 
Colden,  who  was  at  the  time  a  bucktail  member  from 
the  city.  This  policy  did  not  accord  either  with  the 
views  of  Mr.  Clinton  or  Mr.  Yates,  who  of  course  pre- 
vailed, and  the  old  friends  of  Mr.  Clinton  were  generally 
restored  to  office. 


1818.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  467 

Mr.  Josiah  Ogclen  Hoffman,  who  had  been  a  distinguish- 
ed federalistj  as  appears  from  what  I  have  before  related, 
now  claimed  to  be  an  ardent  friend  of  Mr.  Clinton,  and 
he  and  his  friends  pressed  hard  upon  the  council  for  the 
removal  of  Richard  Riker  as  recorder,  and  his  appoint- 
ment as  the  successor;  but  to  this  Mr.  Yates  positively 
refused  his  consent,  and  the  application  of  course  failed. 

A  combination  of  republicans  in  Rensselaer  county, 
headed  by  William  L.  Marcy,  our  late  governor,  then  re- 
corder of  Troy,  was  formed,  who  acted  in  concert  with 
Mr.  Van  Buren.  An  application,  strongly  urged,  was 
made  to  the  council  from  that  county  for  the  removal  of 
such  of  those  men  as  held  office,  and  especially  Mr.  Mar- 
cy. These  men  did  not  come  within  the  description  of 
the  New-York  bucktails.  They  occupied  the  same  poli- 
tical attitude  as  Van  Buren,  who  as  yet  supported  regular 
nominations,  whether  the  persons  nominated  were  for 
or  against  Mr.  Clinton.  I  therefore  refused  to  con- 
sent to  the  removal  of  Mr.  Marcy,  or  any  of  his  friends 
in  like  manner,  as  I  had  refused  to  consent  to  the  removal 
of  Mr.  Van  Buren  from  the  office  of  attorney  general. 
At  the  ensuing  April  election,  however,  the  county  con- 
vention, having,  as  I  was  informed,  nominated  Clintonian 
republicans,  Mr.  Marcy  and  his  friends  got  up  a  bucktail 
set  of  candidates,  and  supported  them  at  the  polls  of  elec- 
tion in  opposition  to  the  regular  republican  ticket;  by 
which  means,  I  believe,  federal  members  of  assembly 
were  returned  from  that  county.  At  the  June  session  of 
the  council,  therefore, in  conformity  with  the  principle  of 
action  I  had  adopted,  I  voted  for  the  removal  of  Mr. 
Marcy  and  his  other  friends,  and  they  were  removed  ac- 
cordingly. 

How  inconsistent  was  the  conduct  of  these  men.  The 
sole  ground  alleged  for  their  opposition  to  Mr.  Clinton 
was,  that  he  was  extending  too  much  favor  to,  and  there- 


468  POLITICAL     HISTORY  fl818. 

by  strengthening  the  federal  party;  but  here  they  opposed 
republican  candidates  when  they  must  have  known  that 
the  effect  of  that  oppostion  would  be  to  procure  a  federal 
representation  from  the  county  of  Rensselaer.  But  this  in- 
consistency was  not  confined  to  them.  In  several  counties 
of  the  state, — as  for  instance  in  the  county  of  Chenango, 
where  General  German  was  elected  in  opposition  to  a  re- 
gular republican  nomination,  by  uniting  with  the  federal- 
ists,— the  conduct  of  the  Clintonian  republicans  was  as  in- 
consistent with  their  professions  as  that  of  the  Rensselaer 
county  bucktails.  Indeed  it  cannot  be  denied  that  Mr. 
Clinton  encouraged  irregular  nominations. 

Before  the  adjournment  of  the  council,  it  was  agreed 
between  Messrs.  Yates,  Livingston  and  Seymour,  to  remove 
Doct.  Cooper  from  the  office  of  secretary  of  state.  I  was 
apprised  of  it,  and  although  I  stated  that  I  should  vote 
against  the  measure,  there  were,  I  confess,  two  considera- 
tions which  induced  me  to  look  upon  it  with  indifference. 
The  one  was,  the  improper  manner  in  which  he  came  into 
the  office,  and  the  other,  that  it  enabled  me  to  redeem  the 
the  pledge  I  had  given  to  Mr.  Yates  to  make  some  provi- 
sion for  J.  V.  N.  Yates. 

Mr.  Livingston  accordingly  at  the  next  meeting  of  the 
council,  in  the  presence  of  the  secretary,  made  a  violent 
attack  upon  him,  and  upon  the  means  by  which  his  appoint- 
ment was  obtained,  and  offered  a  resolution  for  his  remo- 
val, which  was  carried  by  the  votes  of  Messrs.  Living- 
ston, Yates  and  Seymour.  I  voted  against  it  and  the  go- 
vernor entered  his  protest  against  the  measure;  repel- 
ling in  a  spirited  manner,  the  animadversions  made  by  Mr. 
Livingston  on  the  conduct  of  Gov.  Tayler.  After  the 
removal  of  Mr.  Cooper,  upon  my  nomination,  John  Van 
Ness  Yates  was  appointed.  In  many  respects  Mr.  Yates 
was  peculiarly  fitted  for  this  office.  He  was  a  man  of 
fine  literary  taste,  of  ready  resources  of  mind,  possessing 


1818.1  OF    NEW-YORK.  469 

brilliant  if  not  profound  talents,  and  capable  of  doing  much 
within  the  shortest  possible  period  of  time.* 

During  this  session,  Mr.  Edwards  of  New-York,  brought 
a  bill  into  the  assembly  for  calling  a  state  convention  for 
considering  such  parts  of  the  constitution  as  relate  to  the 
appointment  of  officers.  His  object  was  to  abolish  the 
council  of  appointment,  and  provide  for  the  appointment 
of  officers  in  some  other  way.  I  advised  the  governor  and 
his  friends  to  support  this  project;  and  to  enlarge  the 
powers  of  the  convention  in  such  manner  that  they  should 
also  have  the  right  to  consider  the  propriety  of  altering 
and  extending  the  right  of  suffrage.  All  men  had  be- 
come disgusted  with  the  appointing  power,  under  the  old 
constitution,  and  so  universal  was  the  opinion  that  a 
change  ought  to  be  made,  that  I  was  satisfied  that  the 
council  of  appointment  could  not  much  longer  form  a 
part  of  our  governmental  machinery.  The  right  of  suf- 
frage, too,  was  more  restricted  in  this  state  than  in  any 
other  of  the  northern  or  middle  states;  and  I  was  satisfied 
that  public  opinion,  in  a  state  so  highly  democratic,  would 
not  much  longer  endure  the  restriction.  I  told  the  go- 
vernor that  the  project  would  eventually  succeed,  and  that 
he  had  better  seize  upon  it  then,  while  in  one  branch  of 
the  legislature  at  least,  we  had  the  power  of  controlling 
and  keeping  w^ithin  due  bounds  action  upon  the  question; 
but  neither  he  nor  his  friends  would  listen  to  me.  The 
scheme  was  started  by  a  New-York  Bucktail,  and  that  it- 
self seemed  good  cause  of  opposition  to  it.  Indeed,  Gov. 
Clinton  and  his  friends  vainly  hoping  that  they  should  be 
able  to  control  the  council  of  appointment,  seemed  anx- 
ious for  retaining  it.     The  proposition  of  Mr.  Edwards, 


*  This  council  cannot  be  charged,  when  cempared  with  other  councils,  with 
illiberalil7  towards  the  Bucktail  party.  They  appointed  many  of  their  open  and 
avowed  opponents,  among  whom  none  was  more  so  than  General  Root,  and  he 
was  appointed  district  attorney  for  the  county  of  Delaware.  John  Savage  wag 
also  appointed  district  attorney  of  the  county  of  Washington.     Note  F. 


470  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1818. 

although  supported  by  him  with  the  most  ardent  and 
honest  zeal,  and  by  able  and  unanswerable  arguments,  was 
rejected  in  the  assembly. 

The  term  of  service  in  the  senate,  of  Mr.  Ross  and  Mr. 
Cantine  from  the  middle  district,  would  expire  during  this 
yearj  and  their  successors  were  to  be  chosen  at  the  an- 
nual election  in  April.  There  is  no  doubt  but  that  at  that 
time,  a  large  majority  of  the  electors  of  that  district  were 
Clintonians,  but  by  adroit  management,  such  arrangements 
were  made  as  resulted  in  the  election  of  one  Clintonian 
and  one  Bucktail.  Mr.  Cantine  was  not  a  candidate  for 
re-election,  but  Mr.  Ross  and  his  friends  were  extremely 
anxious  that  he  should  be  again  returned.  It  was  con- 
ceded by  all  that  one  of  the  candidates  should  be  taken 
from  the  county  of  Orange,  where  Mr.  Ross  resided,  but 
there  was  a  dispute  whether  the  other  candidates  should  be 
taken  from  the  county  of  Otsego  or  the  county  of  Greene. 
According  to  the  population  of  the  respective  counties,  and 
the  representation  each  county  had  enjoyed  in  the  senate, 
Otsego,  in  preference  to  Greene,  was  entitled  to  the  mem- 
ber. The  decision  of  this  question  was  submitted  to  a 
caucus  of  the  members  of  the  legislature  from  the  middle 
district.  There  would  have  been  little  difficulty  in  deci- 
ding this  question, had  it  not  been  known  that  Moses  Aus- 
tin, an  avowed  Bucktail,  had  been  nominated  by  the  re- 
publicans of  Greene,  and  that  Arunah  Metcalf,  a  very 
estimable  man,  but  who  was  equally  well  known  as  a 
Clintonian,  had  been  designated  by  the  republicans  of  Ot- 
sego county.  A  majority  of  the  members  from  the  mid- 
dle district  were  Clintonians,  and  yet  a  majority  of  those 
members  in  caucus  decided,  in  effect,  that  Austin  should 
be  the  senatorial  candidate.  This  decision  was  produced 
in  the  following  manner:  A  Mr.  Strong  of  Orange  coun- 
ty, had  been  proposed  by  some  of  his  friends,  as  the  suc- 
cessor of  Mr.  Ross;  and  although  the  members  of  assem- 


1818.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  471 

bly  from  that  county  were  decided  Clintoniansj  they  were 
from  personal  and  local  considerations  very  desirous,  as 
I  have  before  stated,  that  Mr.  Ross  should  be  re-elected^ 
and  they  feared  that  in  case  the  Orange  county  dele- 
gation supported  the  claims  of  Otsego;  Columbia,  Dela- 
ware and  Greene,  (Bucktail  counties,)  would  advocate  the 
election  of  Strong,  and  thus  the  expectations  and  wishes 
of  Mr.  Ross  and  his  friends  would  probably  be  defeated. 
Mr.  Van  Buren  very  adroitly  availed  himself  of  their 
fears;  and  eventually  the  members  from  Orange  voted  in 
favor  of  Greene,  which  caused  the  nomination  and  elec- 
tion of  Mr.  Ross  and  Mr.  Austin.  So  that  instead  of 
two  Clintonians  from  the  middle  district  we  had  but  one. 
Before  the  middle  district  convention  adjourned,  it  was 
resolved  to  appoint  a  committee  to  draft  an  address  to  the 
electors  of  the  district,  on  the  subject  of  the  approaching 
election.  Mr.  Van  Buren  was  appointed  chairman  of 
that  committee.  Another  person  agreeing  with  him  in 
political  views,  and  myself,  were  of  that  committee.  He 
drew  an  address,  in  which  he  reviewed  the  political  con- 
test between  the  two  parties  during  the  late  war,  and  most 
soundly  abused  our  old  political  opponents.  The  poor 
federalists,  who  were  so  far  from  being  dangerous,  that  they 
had  no  idea  of  opposing  our  candidates,  be  they  who  they 
might,  very  justly  might  have  complained  of  this  treat- 
ment as  illiberal,  if  not  cruel.  But  on  the  part  of  Mr. 
Van  Buren,  the  measure  was  politic  and  judicious.  If  the 
Clintonian  republicans  refused  to  sign  the  address,  then 
it  was  evidence  of  what  was  charged  against  them, — 
a  secret  understanding  with  the  federalists, — if  they  signed 
it,  then  the  federalists  might  be  told,  that  they  had  no 
more  to  expect  from  one  class  of  the  republicans  than 
from  another;  for  both  had  joined  in  the  uncalled  for  de- 
nunciations against  them.  The  address  eventually  was 
signed  indiscriminately  by  all  the  republican  members. 


472  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1818. 

In  the  summer  of  1817,  Mr.  Solomon  Southwick,  or 
rather  Mr.  Spencer  Staflford,  the  owner,  had  transferred  to 
Mr.  Israel  W.  Clark,  the  Albany  Register  establishment. 

Mr.  Clark  had  formerly  printed,  at  Cooperstown,  a  re- 
publican paper  called  "  The  Watch  Tower."  Though 
defective  in  education,  and  as  a  business  man  not  exactly 
suited  to  this  world,  he  was  a  man  of  great  purity  of  prin- 
ciple and  an  excellent  heart;  and  he  possessed  a  much 
higher  grade  of  talents  than  the  public  in  general  gave 
him  the  credit  of  possessing.  He  thought  highly  of  Mr. 
Clinton,  and  was  enthusiastic  in  the  support  of  his  pro- 
jects of  internal  improvements.  Shortly  after  he  took 
possession  of  the  Register,  he  wTote  and  published  in  that 
paper,  a  series  of  numbers,  in  which  he  sustained  the 
canal  policy  with  great  ability.  Major  Noah  who  then 
edited  the  National  Advocate,  the  leading  Bucktail  pa- 
per, attacked  these  numbers  with  great  zeal;  and  such 
was  the  talent  displayed  by  the  author  that  the  Major 
charged  them  to  the  pen  of  De  Witt  Clinton  himself. 
I  am  thus  particular,  in  order  to  do  justice  to  a  friend, 
not  correctly  appreciated  by  the  public,  whose  memory  I 
still  cherish  with  cordial  affection. 

The  Albany  Argus,  conducted  by  Judge  Buel,  was 
considered  rather  as  the  organ  of  Judge  Spencer;  while 
the  Register,  under  the  management  of  Clark,  was  con- 
sidered, more  especially  as  speaking  the  language  of  the 
governor.  This,  and  the  circumstance  that  Clark  desired 
to  obtain  the  state  printing,  and  allowed  himself  to  be 
flattered  by  Southwick,  who  at  heart  was  seeking  the 
prostration  of  Mr.  Clinton,  that  the  state  patronage  was 
within  his  reach,  produced  a  collision  between  two  leading 
journals  which  ought  to  have  acted  in  cordial  union. 

Before  the  annual  election  in  April,  all  reflecting  men 
foresaw  that  a  permanent  separation  would  take  place 
before  the  next  election  for  governor  between  the  republi- 


1818.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  473 

cans  who  supported  and  those  who  were  opposed  to  Mr. 
Clinton.  The  question  which  produced  the  greatest 
anxiety  in  the  minds  of  politicians  was,  which  party  would 
retain  the  greatest  number  of  democrats,  or  rather,  (which 
perhaps  would  be  more  in  accordance  with  the  truth  of  the 
matter,)  which  party  should  retain  the  name  of  the  repub- 
lican party.  The  election  nevertheless  was  attempted  to 
be  conducted  in  the  usual  way.  The  candidates  were  se- 
lected by  county  and  district  conventions.  In  several 
counties,  however,  one  or  the  other  section  of  the  demo- 
cratic party  rebelled  against  the  decrees  of  these  conven- 
tions, as  in  the  case  of  Rensselaer  and  Chenango  countiesj 
but  symptoms  of  oppugnation  were  most  frequently  mani- 
fested by  the  Clintonians.  The  inclination  of  an  immense 
majority  of  the  federal  party  undoubtedly  was,  to  act 
with  those  whom  they  deemed  to  be  the  real  friends  of  the 
governor. 

In  the  western  district  senatorial  convention,  Gamaliel 
H.  Barstow,  David  E.  Evans  and  Perry  G.  Childs,  were 
nominated.  They  were  selected  because  they  were 
known  to  be  friends  of  the  governor.  Some  opposition 
on  that  account  was  made  to  them  at  the  election.  Mr. 
Childs  in  particular,  who  was  personally  unpopular  in 
consequence  of  having  been  rather  a  grasping  lawyer, 
was  opposed  by  a  respectable  farmer  by  the  name  of 
Paine.  He  would  undoubtedly  have  lost  his  elec- 
tion, had  it  not  been  known  that  Mr.  Paine  was  in  feel- 
ing with  the  Bucktail  party,  while  it  was  believed  Mr. 
Childs  was  a  firm  friend  of  the  governor.  We  shall 
shortly  see  with  what  fidelity  Mr.  Childs,  as  well  as 
Mr.  Evans,  (personally  a  very  estimable  man,)  carried 
into  effect  the  known  wishes  of  those  who  elected  them. 

The  legislature  adjourned  on  the  23d  of  April.  The 
result  of  the  elections  generally  were  favorable  to  the 
governor. 


474 


POLITICAL    HISTORY 


[1818. 


In  the  city  of  New-York,  it  is  true,  the  Bucktail 
assembly  ticket  succeeded  by  a  majority  of  more  than  a 
thousand,  but  in  the  state,  a  majority  of  the  republican 
members  of  assembly  chosen  were  decided  friends  of  the 
governor.  Although  Mr.  Austin  was  elected  from  the 
middle  district,  it  was  very  evident  a  majority  of  the  elec- 
tors in  the  state  were  in  favor  of  Mr.  Clinton,  and  the 
eastern  and  western  districts  had  elected  senators  with 
express  reference  to  that  questimi. 

The  following  are  the  names  of  the  senators  elected: — 
from  the  southern  district,  Darius  Crosbyj  middle,  Wil- 
liam Ross  and  Moses  Austin;  eastern,  George  Rosecrants 
and  Levi  Adams;  western,  Perry  G.  Childs,  Gamaliel  H. 
Barstow  and  David  E.  Evans. 

Before  concluding  this  chapter,  I  must  be  permitted  to 
indulge  in  a  few  reflections  in  relation  to  the  political  po- 
sition of  Mr.  Clinton;  and  upon  the  reasons  why  many 
of  the  republicans  at  this  early  period,  manifested  symp- 
toms of  opposition  to  his  administration. 

Mr.  Clinton  had  been  nominated  in  1817,  by  a  majo- 
rity of  the  republican  party  represented  in  convention, 
upon  the  solomn  assurance  of  Judge  Spencer  and  his  other 
friends,  that  if  nominated  and  elected,  he  would  rigidly 
pursue  a  republican  course,  and  discontinue  al!  connection 
between  himself  and  the  federalists,  if  such  connection 
had  existed.  An  adherence  to  a  republican  course,  it  was, 
I  presume,  well  understood,  would  render  it  his  duty  to 
distribute  the  state  patronage  so  far  as  he  had  an  agency 
in  its  distribution,  as  his  predecessor  had  done,  among  the 
members  of  the  republican  party  only.  The  federalists 
thought  they  were  entitled  to  a  portion  of  the  patronage, 
and  under  the  administration  of  Mr.  Clinton  they  no 
doubt  expected  to  enjoy  it. 

Mr.  Clinton,  when  he  commenced  his  administration, 
professed  his  determination  to  support  the  republican  par- 


m 


1818.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  4^5 

ty,  but  he  affected  to  believe,  that  the  federalists  did  not 
exist  as  a  party.  He  alleged  that  there  was  no  difference 
of  opinion  in  relation  to  the  measures,  and  of  course  there 
could  not  be  two  parties.  He  was  cold  and  distant  in  his 
deportment  towards  Mr.  Van  Buren,  Mr.  Young,  Mr. 
Skinner,  and  other  leading  republicans  who  had  opposed 
his  nomination;  and  when  he  spoke  of  them  his  language 
was  calculated  to  produce  unfavorable  impressions  in  rela- 
tion to  their  political  views  and  motives;  while  he  was 
known  to  be  in  habits  of  frequent  and  confidential  com- 
munication with  Judge  Van  Ness,  Judge  Piatt  and  other 
leading  federalists.  Still  he  was  extremely  unwilling  to 
appoint  federalists  to  office.  Judge  Van  Ness  used  to 
apologize  to  his  friends  who  solicited  appointments,  in  the 
best  manner  he  could;  and  was  known  to  have  entreated 
them  to  wait  for  a  short  time,  and  "  until  Mr.  Clinton 
should  get  fairly  info  the  saddle.''^ 

Was  it  unreasonable  to  expect  that  this  conduct  of  the 
governor  and  the  declarations  made  by  leading  federalists 
of  the  tenor  of  what  I  have  quoted,  would  not  excite  the 
jealousy  of  the  republicans,  and  alarm  those  of  them  who 
had  but  recently  emerged  from  the  tremendous  contest 
with  that  party  during  the  late  war  % 

But  in  truth  the  federalists  as  a  party,  were  neither  dis- 
banded nor  annihilated.  It  is  true,  the  glitter  and  blaze 
of  their  watch  fires  were  not  visible,  but  they  were  smoth 
ered, — not  extinguished.  The  "  emhers'''  remained  and 
there  were  not  wanting  many,  who  like  Mr.  Coleman, 
were  ready  to  fan  them  into  a  flame.  It  was,  therefore,  a 
vain  attempt  of  Mr.  Clinton,  when  he  sought  to  acquire 
and  retain  the  confidence  of  both  parties.  He  should 
either  have  adhered  strictly  to  the  usages  and  discipline 
of  the  republican  party,  or  he  should  have  openly  or  pub- 
licly declared  that  he  disclaimed  all  connection  with  any 
party   and    that   his  selections   to  office  should  be  made 


476  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [ISIS. 

from  among  the  most  talented  and  worthy,  irrespective  of 
the  political  party  of  which  they  might  have  been  mem- 
bers. The  latter  course  he  could  not  take  without  viola- 
ting the  pledges  made  in  his  name  by  Judge  Spencer,  and 
the  former  was  so  directly  at  war  with  his  feelings  that 
had  he  attempted  it,  he  was  incapable  of  carrying  it  out 
in  good  faith. 

If  Mr.  Clinton  had  any  general  system  of  political  ac- 
tion, it  was  one  tending  to  a  merger  or  amalgamation  of 
all  parties  into  one,  or  to  erect  out  of  the  two  existing 
parties  a  third  party,  the  object  of  which  should  be  his 
individual  support.  The  idea  of  an  amalgamation  of  parties 
in  a  free  state,  is  chimerical,  and  the  notion  that  three 
great  parties  can,  for  any  considerable  time  exist,  is  ridi 
culous. 


1S18.]  or  NEW- YORK.  477 


CHAPTER   XXIV. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1818,  TO  MAY  1,  1819. 

Few  events  of  political  importance  occurred  during  the 
summer  of  this  year. 

There  can  be  little  doubt  but  that  the  leaders  of  the 
party,  of  which  Mr.  Van  Buren  was  the  head,  determined, 
before  the  meeting  of  the  legislature  now  chosen,  to  draw 
the  line  distinctly  between  the  supporters  and  opponents 
of  the  governor.  The  difficulty  consisted  in  doing  this  in 
such  a  way  as  to  produce  a  conviction  that  the  governor's 
friends  were  a  minority,  and  a  dissenting-  section  from  the 
republican  party. 

Partly  by  accident,  and  partly  by  good  management  on 
the  part  of  the  Van  Buren  party,  and  bad  management  of 
Mr.  Clinton  and  his  friends,  this  object  was  effected,  or 
claimed  to  have  been  effected. 

William  Thompson,  a  native  of  Saratoga  county,  had 
established  himself  in  the  practice  of  law  in  the  county  of 
Seneca.  He  was  a  young  man  of  respectable  talents,  and 
had  once  or  twice  represented  that  county  in  the  assembly; 
and,  while  a  member,  some  personal  difficulty  had  occurred 
between  him  and  Lieut.  Gov.  Taylor.  A  sharp  contest 
had  also  happened  between  him  and  Mr.  Elisha  Williams 
of  Hudson,  in  relation  to  the  public  buildings  in  Seneca 
county — Thompson  contending  that  they  ought  to  be  loca- 
ted at  Ovid,  and  Williams,  that  Waterloo,  where  he  was 
largely  interested,  ought  to  be  their  site.  Mr.  Thompson 
was  again,  in  April,  1818,  elected  to  the  assembly  from 
Seneca.  He  was  a  man  of  warm  passions,  and,  from  the 
circumstances  I  have  mentioned,  had  acquired  strong  pre- 
judices against  several  persons  of  standing  and  influence 


4fTB  POLITICAL    HISTOR?  [1818. 

in  the  central  part  of  the  state,  and  among  them,  Gov. 
Clinton  came  in  for  a  share  of  his  dislike.  He  was  readily 
fixed  upon  as  the  candidate  of  the  Van  Buren  party  for 
speaker,  because  he  was  a  western  man;  and  on  that  ac- 
count, as  well  as  on  account  of  the  interest  which  several 
members,  who  lived  in  the  same  district  of  country  with 
him,  felt  in  favor  of  locating  the  court-house  at  Ovid,  it 
was  supposed  some  members  would  vote,  in  caucus,  for 
him,  who  would  not  vote  for  Mr.  Sharp,  or  other  distin- 
guished Bucktails  resident  in  the  southern  part  of  the 
state.  Mr.  Thompson  was  undoubtedly  informed  of  this, 
probably  by  his  old  acquaintance  and  friend.  Col.  Young, 
before  he  left  home;  and  measures  were  taken  to  procure 
the  attendance  in  Albany,  on  the  evening  before  the  ses- 
sion, of  every  one  who  it  was  believed,  or  hoped,  would, 
in  caucus,  vote  for  Thompson. 

The  day  appointed  by  law  for  the  meeting  of  the  legis- 
lature, was  the  5th  of  January.  The  arrangement  for  the 
nomination  of  Mr.  Thompson  for  speaker,  was  kept  a  pro- 
found secret  from  the  Clintonian  republicans;  and  an  im 
pression  prevailed  among  them  that  John  Van  Ness  Yates, 
who  had  been  elected  to  the  assembly  from  Albany,  a  man 
supposed  to  be  rather  unsettled  as  to  which  party  he  would 
attach  himself,  w^ould  be  the  speaker. 

Gov.  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer  desired  for  speaker  a 
more  decided  man  than  Mr.  Yates;  but  presuming  upon 
their  influence  with  the  members  from  the  country,  had 
taken  no  measures  to  fix  public  sentiment  upon  any  one, 
until  the  day  before  the  legislature  were  to  meet,  when 
they  determined  upon  Gen.  German.  I  cannot  but  con- 
sider this  determination  as  extremely  injudicious.  Mr. 
German  himself,  from  his  native  good  sense,  at  first  dis- 
approved of  it.  It  was  a  long  time  since  he  had  been  a 
member  of  the  assembly.  He  knew  that  prejudices  existed 
against  him   among   many   even   of  Mr.  Clinton's   best 


1818.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  479 

friends.  He  wished,  he' said,  to  take  his  place  as  a  floor 
member  of  the  house,  and  he  hoped,  in  the  course  of  the 
session,  to  regain  the  confidence  of  his  old  friends.  But 
this  did  not  satisfy  the  governor-  Possibly  some  of  the 
federal  members  who  were  in  town,  may  have  urged  that 
German  ought  to  be  the  speaker.  They,  no  doubt,  wished 
to  widen  the  breach  between  the  Clintonian  and  Van  Bu- 
ren  republicans.  What  could  hasten  that  breach  more 
effectually  than  the  support  of  German  for  speaker  ?  He 
had,  while  in  congress,  opposed  the  declaration  of  war, 
and  some  of  the  war  measures.  He  had  signed  the  ad- 
dress against  the  election  of  Tompkins,  in  1813,  and  he, 
at  that  moment,  owed  his  election  to  the  federalists,  hav- 
ing been  chosen  in  opposition  to  a  regular  democratic 
nomination.  If,  then,  it  was  desirable  that  Mr.  Clinton 
should  retain  in  his  support  a  majority  of  the  republicans, 
nothing  could  have  been  more  mal-apropos  than  the  sup- 
port of  Mr.  German.  But,  if  it  was  unwise  in  Mr.  Clin- 
ton and  Judge  Spencer,  to  determine  on  him  as  a  candi- 
date, it  was  still  more  inexcusable  to  have  brought  him 
forward  without  consultation,  and  without  previous  ar- 
rangements with  their  friends  in  the  country.  Objectiona- 
ble as  Gen.  German  was,  there  can  be  very  little  doubt, 
if  proper  measures  had  been  taken  a  few  weeks  before  the 
meeting  of  the  legislature,  a  majority  of  the  republicans 
might  have  been  obtained  who  would  have  supported  him 
in  caucus.  But  not  the  slightest  effort  was  made  by  the 
governor,  or  his  friends  at  Albany,  to  prepare  the  mmds 
of  their  friends  in  the  country  for  such  a  measure.  On 
the  contrary,  they  were  wholly  ignorant  of  the  project, 
until  they  arrived  in  Albany. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  thought  that  I  attach  too  much  im- 
portance to  this  transaction,  but  I  am  sure  I  do  not.  If 
names  and  forms,  on  any  occasion,  are  things,  they  em- 
phatically were  so  at  that  time.      I  aver  it  as  my  delibe- 


480  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1819. 

Tate  opinion,  that  the  error  committed  by  the  Cllntonian 
republicans,  in  respect  to  the  support  of  Mr.  German  on 
the  evening  of  the  4th,  and  on  the  fifth  day  of  January, 
was  the  cause  of  their  prostration  and  ruin  as  a  party. 

At  the  caucus,  on  the  evening  before  the  day  appointed 
for  the  meeting  of  the  legislature,  there  were  seventy-five 
republican  members  present.  On  balloting  for  speaker, 
Thompson  received  forty-two  votes,  and  German  thirty- 
three.  As  I  have  before  remarked,  all  the  Bucktail 
members  were  there,  while  from  ten  to  fifteen  Clintonians 
had  not  arrived.  After  the  result  of  the  balloting  was 
announced,  the  friends  of  German  refused  to  vote  in  favor 
of  concurring  with  the  majority;  and  the  next  day  also, 
when  the  house  convened,  they  refused  to  support  him. 
In  this,  in  my  judgment,  they  were  clearly  in  the  wrong. 
It  is  useless  to  allege  that  all  their  friends  had  not  arrived. 
That  they  knew  before  they  went  into  caucus.  When 
they  consented  to  a  caucus  nomination  they  were  pledged 
to  support  that  nomination,  and  it  was  a  violation  of 
plighted  faith  and  honor  to  refuse  to  do  so.  It  was  the 
very  predicament  in  which  their  opponents  desired  to 
place  them.  The  actual  result  was  a  far  greater  gratifica 
tion  to  Van  Buren  and  his  friends  than  if  Thompson  had 
been  elected. 

When  the  assembly  met,  on  the  morning  of  the  5th  of 
January,  upon  balloting  for  speaker,  no  one  had  a  majority 
of  all  the  votes.  The  candidates  were  German,  Thomp- 
son, and  Duer  of  Albany.  On  the  first  ballot  German 
received  more  votes  than  either  of  the  other  two  candi- 
dates. The  house,  after  balloting  four  times,  with  nearly 
the  same  result,  adjourned  to  the  next  day.  On  the  morn- 
ing of  the  6th,  another  ballot  was  taken,  the  result  of 
which  was  as  follows: — German,  fifty-five;  Thompson, 
thirty-eight;  Duer,  twenty. 


1819.]  OF     NEW- YORK.  481 

No  one  having  a  majority  of  all  the  votes,  Gen.  Root 
offered  a  resolution  that  William  Thompson  be  appointed 
speaker  of  that  house.  The  following  members  voted  in 
favor  of  this  resolution: — Beebe,  Blakely,  Clark,  Cleland, 
Conklin,  Crolius,  Deyo,  Eldred,  Ells,  Fosdick,  Foster, 
Frost,  Gale,  Groot,  J.  Guion,  Gurnee,  Hatfield,  E.  Hill, 
N.  P.  Hill,  Hovi^ell,  Howes,  Humphrey,  Hunter,  Irving, 
Litchfield,  McCall,  Morgan,  Nichols,  Osborn,  Patterson, 
Reynolds,  Romaine,  Root,  Sharp,  Spencer,  Ulshoeffer,Wat- 
kins,  Weed,  A.  Wells,  Williams  and  Youngs — forty-one. 

The  whole  number  of  votes  given  for  Mr.  Thompson 
being  but  forty-one,  and  the  residue  of  the  members  pre- 
sent voting  in  the  negative,  the  resolution  was  rejected. 

A  motion  was  then  made,  that  William  A.  Duer  be  de- 
clared speaker,  and  the  following  members  voted  in  favor 
of  this  resolution: — Barker,  Beebe,  Beadle,  Carman,  Da- 
vis, Finch,  Frost,  H.  Guyon,  Houghtaling,  Huntington, 
Ketcham,  King,  Kissam,  Lapham,  Litchfield,  Livingston, 
Oakley,  Piatt,  Requa,  Root,  Simmons,  Swart,  J.  Thomp- 
son, Tomlison,  Van  Burcn,  Van  Loan,  Van  Rensselaer, 
Waldron,  S.  Warren,  A.  Wells  and  Williams — thirty-one. 

All  the  other  members  voting  in  the  negative  this  reso- 
lution was  lost. 

After  the  rejection  of  these  resolutions,  one  was  offered 
for  the  appointment  of  Obadiah  German,  and  it  was 
adopted,  sixty-seven  members  voting  in  the  affirmative,and 
forty-eight  in  the  negative.  On  this  question  Mr.  Duer 
and  Mr.  John  A.  King,  of  Queens  county,  voted  in  the 
negative. 

The  refusal  of  the  Clintonian  members  of  the  legislature 
to  adhere  to  the  determination  of  a  republican  legislative 
caucus,  and  the  eventual  support,  in  connection  with  the 
federalists,  of  a  man  holding  such  a  political  standing  as 
Gen.  German  at  that  time  held,  excited  alarm  among  the 
republicans  throughout  the  state.     Was  there  not  good 

31 


482  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1819. 

cause  for  that  alarm  1  Probably  ninety-nine  out  of  a 
hundred,  of  Mr.  Clinton's  republican  friends,  earnestly 
wished  to  keep  the  democratic  party,  as  a  party,  together. 
Was  there  any  way  of  effecting  that  object,  except  by  the 
enforcement  of  the  usage,  that  on  ques^ions  about  the  se- 
lections for  office,  the  minority  should  yield  to  the  majo- 
rity 1  Here  was  a  flagrant  violation  of  that  rule,  at  the 
seat  of  government,  in  favor  of  a  man,  who,  to  his  politi- 
cal sins  for  six  years  past,  had  added  yet  another,  by  ob- 
taining a  seat  in  the  assembly  by  federal  votes,  against  a 
candidate  nominated  by  a  regular  republican  county  con- 
vention. 

The  governor,  in  his  speech,  presented  a  very  able  view 
of  the  condition  and  prospects  of  the  state.  He  again 
reviewed  the  canal  policy,  and  reminded  the  legislature, 
that  by  the  act  of  April  15, 1817,  the  canal  commissioners 
were  merely  authorized  to  contract  for  making  canals  be- 
tween the  Mohawk  and  Seneca  rivers,  and  between  Lake 
Champlain  and  the  river  Hudson  at  Fort  Edward;  and  he 
forcibly  and  strongly  recommended  authorizing,  by  law, 
the  commissioners  to  open  the  entire  line  of  canal  naviga- 
tion from  Lake  Erie  to  the  tide  waters  of  the  Hudson,  and 
from  Fort  Edward  to  the  head  of  sloop  navigation  on  the 
North  river.  He  recommended  several  other  important 
matters  in  relation  to  other  great  interests  of  the  state. 

After  reading  this,  and  other  of  the  annual  messages  of 
Gov.  Clinton,  so  unobjectionable,  judicious  and  patriotic 
are  his  views,  that  one,  lit  this  period,  will  be  at  loss  to 
account  for  the  reason  why  any  honest  and  upright  man^ 
who  felt  a  due  regard  to  the  interest  and  honor  of  the 
state,  could  find  it  in  his  heart  to  oppose  him. 

The  term  of  service  of  Rufus  King,  in  the  United 
States  senate,  was  to  expire  on  the  4th  of  March  of  this 
year,  and  it  was  the  duty  of  the  present  legislature  to  ap- 
point a  successor.     But,  before  their  meeting,  it  had  been 


1819.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  483 

industriously  circulated  among  the  republican  Clintonians, 
by  the  opponents  of  the  governor,  that  he  was  in  favor  of 
the  re-election  of  Mr.  King,  and  that  he  was  induced  to 
take  this  course  with  a  view  to  conciliate  the  federalists. 
Nothing  could  be  more  untrue  than  this  allegation.  It 
was  in  vain  that  he  denied  it.  The  very  men  who  circu- 
lated the  report,  at  the  same  time  stated,  that  the  governor 
publicly  disclaimed  such  intention, but  they,  notwithstand- 
ing, insisted  that  he  was  secretly  in  favor  of  the  measure. 
How  was  it  possible  to  disprove  a  charge  made  and  sus- 
tained in  this  manner  1  If  Mr.  Clinton,  in  his  conversa- 
tion about  an  United  States  senator,  spoke  against  the  re- 
election of  Mr.  King,  it  was  precisely  the  course  of  con- 
duct which  his  opponents  had  indicated. 

On  the  other  hand,  many  leading  and  bigoted  federal- 
ists ascertained  what  were  the  real  feelings  of  Mr.  Clinton 
towards  Mr.  King,  and  from  that  moment  they  declared 
war  against  him.  Hence,  the  conduct  and  votes  of  Mr. 
Duer  and  Mr.  John  A.  King  in  relation  to  the  election  of 
Gen.  German  as  speaker,  who,  when  the  final  question 
was  taken,  refused  to  vote  for  him.  Hence,  Field  Mar- 
shal Coleman,  in  his  paper,  after  the  election,  in  1820, 
declared,  that,  until  shortly  before  the  election,  he  was 
not  only  opposed  to  Clinton,  but  even  preferred  Tomp- 
kins to  him.*  But  it  is  not  less  curious  than  true,  that 
while  Mr.  Clinton  was  losing  friends  among  the  federal- 
ists, because,  as  they  charged,  and  probably  truly,  that  he 
was  personally  hostile  to  Mr.  King,  he  was  losing  many 
of  his  republican  friends,  because  the  Bucktails  charged 
him  with  a  friendship  and  preference  for  the  same  gentle- 
man. 

The  federalists  in  the  legislature,  led  by  Mr.  Van  Vech- 
ten  in  the  senate,  and  Mr.  Duer  and  Mr.  Oakley  in  the* 
assembly,  perceiving  that  the  members  claiming  to  be 

*  See  Evening  Post,  May,  1820. 


484  POLITICAL    HISTORt  [1819. 

democratic  would  disagree  in  the  choice  of  senator,  deter- 
mined to  support  Mr.  King.  I  am,  however,  aware,  and 
I  ought  to  have  mentioned,  that,  by  this  time,  two  parties 
had  sprung  up  among  the  federalists.  A  minority,  led  by 
Mr.  Duer  in  the  assembly,  and  by  Mr.  Coleman  and  the 
Goodies,  in  New- York,  were  determined  to  make  war  on 
the  governor,  while  a  large  majority,  at  the  head  of  whom 
stood  Mr.  Oakley,  in  the  legislature,  and  judges  Van 
Ness  and  Piatt,  out  of  it,  seemed  equally  determined  to 
amalgamate  with  the  Clintonian  party,  and  support  Mr. 
Clinton's  administration.  Why,  then,  did  the  latter  class, 
on  the  question  of  speaker,  and  in  the  election  of  a  sena- 
tor, take  a  course  so  embarrassing  to  the  governor  and  his 
friends  1  Why  did  they  not  pursue  that  line  of  conduct 
best  calculated  to  secure  to  him  the  support  of  the  majo- 
rity of  the  republican  party  1  It  is  often  difficult,  and 
sometimes  impossible,  to  discern  the  real  motives  of  poli- 
ticians. 

Notwithstanding  the  dissentions  which  had  occurred  in 
the  choice  of  a  speaker,  and  the  violation,  on  the  part  of 
the  Clintonians,  of  the  obligations  they  incurred  when 
they  consented  to  go  into  a  caucus,  it  was  determined  to 
call  a  meeting  of  all  the  republican  members  of  the  legis- 
lature for  the  purpose  of  nominating  a  senator.  The 
Clintonian  members  of  the  senate  had  had  no  agency  in 
the  proceedings  relative  to  the  speakerj  and  several  of 
them,  particularly  Doct.  Barstow  of  Tioga,  Mr.  Adams 
of  Lewis,  and  myself,  were  determined  not  to  permit  a 
permanent  separation  of  the  republican  party,  if,  by  any 
means,  it  could  be  avoided.  A  meeeting  was  therefore 
called,  in  the  senate  chamber,  to  nominate  a  senator,  and 
due  notice  for  that  purpose  given.  The  Clintonians  had 
fixed  upon  John  C.  Spencer,  a  member  of  the  United 
States  house  of  representatives,  for  their  candidate,  (and, 
in  justice  to  him,  I  ought  to  say,  this  was  entirely  without 


I 


1819.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  485 

his  knowledge,)  while  it  was  well  understood  that  the 
Bucktail  candidate  was  Col.  Young.  We  did  not  know 
what  the  result  might  be,  but  were  determined  to  support 
any  gentleman  who  should  be  nominated. 

The  Bucktail  members  of  the  legislature  soon  ascer- 
tained, with  certainty,  their  own  strength;  and  there  is 
every  reason  to  believe  that  they  became  well  satisfied 
that  a  majority  of  the  republicans  in  the  two  houses  were 
for  Mr,  Spencer.  I  say  this,  because  there  was  good  rea- 
son to  believe,  from  their  conduct  in  the  caucus  which 
was  held,  that  they  had  determined  before  they  came 
there,  to  break  up  the  meeting  without  any  nomination. 
The  evidence  evinced  by  their  conduct  at  the  caucus,  of 
this  determination,  is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  neither 
Mr.  Van  Buren  nor  Col.  Young  attended.  The  absence 
of  Mr.  Van  Buren  might  be  accounted  for  by  the  extreme 
illness  of  his  wife,  but  Col.  Young  had  no  such  excuse. 

After  the  meeting  was  organized,  some  gentleman,  op- 
posed to  the  governor,  addressed  the  meeting  by  animad- 
verting with  great  severity  on  his  character  and  conduct, 
and  concluded  by  reproaching  the  Clintonians  for  not 
adhering  to  the  caucus  nomination  of  speaker.  Among 
others.  Gen.  German  replied,  and  defended  the  political 
character  of  the  governor,  and  the  conduct  of  his  friends. 
He  was  followed  by  a  violent  personal  attack  by  Mr. 
Peter  R.  Livingston.  It  appeared  to  be  his  object  to  in^ 
duce  a  personal  quarrel  between  himself  and  Mr.  German. 
Gen.  German  was  neither  slow  to  answer,  nor  backward 
in  retorting  personal  abuse.  This  kind  of  altercation 
could  not  be  endured  by  a  large  majority  of  the  meeting, 
and  it  finally  was  dissolved  without  even  an  attempt  to 
transact  any  business,  on  the  motion  of  Mr.  John  T.  Ir- 
ving, a  member  from  New-York.  I  own  I  was  glad  when 
the  meeting  broke  up,  and,  I  believe,  I  seconded  the  mo- 
tion of  Mr.  Irving;  but  I  was  wrong.     It  afterwards,  as  I 


486  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1819. 

thinkj  pretty  clearly  appeared  that  the  Clintonlans  were 
in  the  majority.  They,  therefore,  should  have  refused  to 
adjourn.  They  should  have  insisted  on  making  a  nomi- 
nation, and  if  their  opponents  refused  to  support  it,  then 
they  might,  with  great  plausibility,  have  denounced  them 
as  a  faction. 

This  was  the  last  time  the  Clintonians  and  Bucktails 
attempted  to  caucus  together  as  political  friends. 

A  few  evenings  afterwards  the  Clintonians  held  a  meet- 
ing by  themselves,  and  unanimously  nominated  John  C. 
Spencer. 

On  the  day  fixed  by  law  for  the  election  of  senator,  no 
nomination  could  be  made.  The  federalists  voted  for  Mr. 
King,  the  Bucktails  for  Mr.  Young,  and  the  Clintonians  for 
Mr.  Spencer.  In  the  assembly  Mr.  Spencer  received  fifty- 
four  votes,  Mr.  Young  forty-four,  and  Mr.  King  thirty - 
four.  Some  of  the  members,  w^ho,  on  the  resolution, 
voted  for  Col.  Young,  when  the  resolution  was  lost,  voted 
for  Mr.  King.  The  whole  number  of  republican  votes,  in 
both  houses,  for  Col.  Young,  were  fifty-seven,  while 
those  given  to  Mr.  Spencer  were  sixty-four;  showing 
evidently,  at  that  time,  a  republican  majority  in  the  legis- 
lature in  favor  of  Mr.  Clinton;  but  the  preponderance  of 
talent  was  decidedly  with  the  Bucktails. 

Ezekiel  Bacon,  late  comptroller  of  the  United  States 
treasury,  a  Clintonian  member  from  Oneida  county,  was  a 
man  of  considerable  talent,  but  the  strenoth  and  vigor  of 
his  mind  had  been  greatly  impaired  by  a  nervous  disease. 
Gen.  German,  as  I  have  somewhere  before  remarked, 
when  he  came  into  public  life,  was  an  uneducated  man, 
but  possessed,  by  nature,  a  strong  and  powerful  intellect, 
which  was  now  improved  by  long  experience  in  legisla- 
tion. These  gentleman  had  to  encounter  and  repel  the 
attacks  of  S.  B.  Romaine,  UlshoefFer,  J.  T.  Irving  and 
Sharpe,  together  with  the  galling  fire  of  Gen.  Root.     Mr. 


1819.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  487 

Duer  was  gathering  the  materials  for  the-  party  of  "  high 
minded  federalists,"  and  omitted  no  opportunity  of  assail- 
ing the  character  and  administration  of  the  governor. 
Oakley,  at  the  head  of  the  largest  portion  of  federalists, 
assumed  to  take  an  independent  course,  and  to  maintain 
an  armed  neutrality,  but  it  was  well  understood  that  he, 
and  his  party,  intended  eventually  to  indentify  themselves 
with  the  Clintonians.  Doct.  Barstow,  of  the  senate,  was 
shrewd  and  sagacious,  but  quite  unable  to  cope  with  such 
giants  as  Van  Buren  and  Young.  Henry  Yates,  who,  it 
will  be  remembered,  held  the  casting  vote  in  the  council 
of  1818,  no  longer  claimed  to  be  a  supporter  of  Mr.  Clin- 
ton, but  acted  openly  and  decidedly  with  the  Bucktails. 
If  he  was  before,  as  I  thought  I  had  reason  to  suspect, 
inclined  to  identify  himself  with  that  party,  the  conduct 
of  the  Clintonians  in  the  choice  of  a  speaker,  furnished 
him  with  a  plausible  excuse  for  effectuating  his  intention. 
The  Clintonian  and  Bucktail  republicans  were  now 
known  as  two  distinct  parties^  and  the  last  mentioned 
party  received  an  accession  of  strength,  in  the  senate, 
which  was  not  anticipated  by  the  Clintonians.  Not  long 
after  the  meeting  of  the  legislature,  Mr.  Childs  and  Mr. 
Evans  began  to  manifest  symptoms  of  dissatisfaction  with 
the  party  which  had  elected  them,  and  soon  after  the  sepa- 
ration of  which  I  have  spoken,  publicly  took  ground  with 
the  adverse  party.  In  this,  I  think  they  were  wrong;  for, 
although  I  am  not  a  believer  in  the  doctrine  of  instruc- 
tions, to  the  extent  it  is  held  in  Virginia  and  some  other 
states  in  the  union,  I  do  think,  that  if  a  man  is  elected  by 
a  political  party,  because  he  professes  to  be  a  member  of 
that  party,  if,  after  his  election,  he  changes  his  opinions, 
as  it  is  possible  he  may  conscientiously  do,  he  ought,  in 
such  case,  to  give  back  the  power  which  has  been  commit- 
ted to  him  by  his  constituents,  and  afford  thein  an  oppor- 
tunity to  re-elect  him,  if  they  also  have  changed  their 


488  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1819. 

opinions;  and  if  they  have  not  changed  them,  to  allow 
them  the  opportunity  of  choosing  a  representative  who 
will  carry  into  effect  their  wishes. 

During  the  pending  session  of  the  legislature,  with  the 
exception  of  Messrs.  Van  Buren,  Young  and  Skinner  of 
the  senate,  nearly,  if  not  all  those  who  opposed  themselves 
to  Mr.  Clinton,  founded  their  opposition  to  him  upon  an 
avowed  opposition  to  the  system  of  internal  improvements 
which  he  advocated.  This  attitude  was  taken  by  the  re- 
presentation from  the  southern  district  in  the  senate  and 
assembly,  and  by  Gen.  Root  and  others  in  various  other 
parts  of  the  state.  The  National  Advocate,  the  leading 
Bucktail  paper  in  the  state,  had  boldly  staked  the  fate  of 
the  party  on  the  trial  of  that  issue.  But,  during  this  ses- 
sion, a  change  in  this  respect  took  place.  Mr.  Buel,  un- 
der an  assurance  from  the  majority  in  the  senate,  that  he 
should  be  retained  as  state  printer,  came  out  in  the  Argus 
against  the  governor,  and  that  paper  now  became  the  offi- 
cial Van  Buren  paper.  It  was  said,  likewise,  that  a  cau- 
cus was  held,  of  the  republican  members  opposed  to  Gov. 
Clinton,  at  which  it  was  determined  to  support  the  pro- 
jected internal  improvements.  Whether  such  a  determi- 
nation was  formally  made  in  caucus,  I  am  unable  to  sayj 
but  it  is  certain,  that  a  sudden  and  most  important  change, 
about  this  time,  did  take  place  in  the  action  of  the  Buck- 
tail  party,  with  respect  to  the  canal,  and  that  that  change 
was  almost  universal.  Mr.  Sharpe  of  the  assembly,  and 
two  or  three  of  the  southern  senators,  were  too  stubborn 
to  surrender  immediately,  and  Gen.  Root  occasionally 
exercised  his  wit  upon  the  projectors  and  supporters  of 
the  canals;  but  after  this,  as  a  partj/j  they  made  no  oppo- 
sition to  this  great  work.  It  is  not  improbable  that  some 
were  induced  to  take  this  course  from  the  consideration 
that,  so  long  as  they  continued  their  opposition  to  the  ca- 
nal, the  whole  west  would  be  against  them.     But  it  is 


1819.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  489 

wrong  to  suspect  a  man  of  doing,  from  selfish  and  bad 
motives,  a  good  act. 

After  the  opposition  to  Mr.  Clinton's  views,  in  respect 
to  internal  improvements,  was  given  up,  there  remained 
no  measures  about  which  the  two  sections  of  the  republi- 
can party  differed.  Here  then,  were  two  parties,  bitter 
and  virulent  against  each  other,  who  cordially  agreed  on 
all  questions  of  principle,  and  measures  affecting  the  inter- 
est of  the  state,  and  who  mutually  concurred  in  their  sup- 
port of  the  men  who  administered  the  general  govern- 
ment. Might  not  Mr.  Clinton,  justly  complain  that  while 
the  measures  proposed  by  him  w^ere  approved,  he  was 
himself  the  object  of  a  most  bitter  hostility?  Did  his 
opponents  object  to  his  integrity  or  capacity  1  No  man 
pretended  to  question  the  purity  of  his  private  character, 
all  admitted  that  he  possessed  talents  of  the  highest  or- 
der. In  one  respect,  however,  to  use  a  legal  phrase,  Mr. 
Clinton  was  estopped  from  making' such  complaint.  The 
same  Mr.  Clinton  had  assailed  and  finally  prostrated  Gov. 
Lewis  on  the  same  ground,  and  with  the  same  weapons 
which  were  now  used  against  himself.  If  the  chalice 
which  Mr.  Van  Buren  now  presented  to  him  was  poisoned, 
it  was  the  same  which   Mr.  Clinton    had    commended    to 

Mr.  Lewis. 

There  were  two  prominent  grounds  of  attack  on  Gov. 

Clinton.  The  one  was,  that  he  claimed  that  he  was  in 
himself  the  party^  ihat  he  challenged  the  admiration  and 
almost  adoration  of  his  friends,  and  that  the  only  decisive 
evidence  of  political  merit  among  his  supporters  was  per- 
sonal devotion  to  him.  It  must  be  confessed  that  there 
were  some  grounds  for  this  charge.  Mr.  Clinton  from  his 
boyhood,  had  been  the  child  of  power,  and  either  directly 
or  indirectly  the  distributer  of  patronage.  At  an  early 
age  he  was  secretary  of  Gov.  George  Clinton,  and  during 
the  time  he  was  such  secretary,  and  after  the  political 


490  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1819, 

revolution  in  1801,  when  the  elder  Clinton  was  restored 
to  the  executive  chair,  what  more  efficient  means  had  the 
applicants  for  office  to  reach  the  heart  of  the  venerable 
governor  than  through  the  agency  and  influence  of  a  favor- 
ite nephewl  After  George  Clinton  had  left  the  state,  and 
after  the  overthrow  of  Lewis,  and  until  the  year  1814, 
De  Witt  Clinton  was  looked  up  to  as  almost  the  sovereign 
dispenser  of  governmental  patronage.  It  would  be  strange 
if  after  such  a  training,  the  force  of  habit  alone  had  not 
rendered  him  attached  to  adulation.  Office  seekers,  and 
especially  many  of  his  old  friends  in  New-York,  soon  per- 
ceived that  eulogiums  on  De  Witt  Clinton  furnished 
the  most  effectual  means  of  defeating  rivals  for  place  and 
emolument.  These  praises  which  really  sounded  like  adu- 
lation, were  not  suited  to  the  taste  of  stern  republicans 
and  independent  freemen. 

The  other  ground  of  accusation  was  that  the  governor 
was  improperly  but  secretly  united  with  the  old  federal 
party.  This  charge  was  feebly  sustained  by  proof,  but 
from  the  manner  in  which  it  was  made,  I  have  before  hinted 
it  was  difficult,  if  not  impossible  to  disprove  it;  and  when 
we  consider  that  the  federal  party,  at  that  time,  declared 
themselves  disbanded  in  the  state  and  nation;  that  Mr. 
Clinton  had  as  yet,appointed  very  few  federalists  to  office, — 
probably  fewer  than  Governor  Tompkins  would  have  done 
had  he  continued  in  the  government,  and  less  in  proportion 
than  Mr.  Monroe  in  the  administration  of  the  general 
government  had  appointed,  the  Bucktails  in  the  meantime, 
claiming  to  be  the  exclusive  friends  of  his  administration, — 
no  good  reason  can  now  suggest  itself  to  any  mind  why 
this  charge  should  have  injuriously  affected  Mr.  Clinton. 
But  in  truth  it  did  effect  him  most  seriously.  It  drew 
from  his  support  a  large  portion  of  those  who  are  gener- 
ally called  the  rank  and  file  men.  The  charge  was  con- 
tmually  being  made,  and   was  not  and  could  not  be  dis- 


1819.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  491 

proved;  and  in  their  minds  it  was  confirmed  by  the  fact 
that  a  portion  of  the  federalists  affected  to  be,  and  pro- 
bably really  were,  the  friends  and  supporters  of  the 
governor. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  praises  which  were  continually 
in  the  mouths  of  some  of  Mr.  Clinton's  partizans,  and 
chaunted  in  many  of  the  Clintonian  newspapers,  disgusted 
and  detatched  from  the  support  of  the  state  administration 
many  high  minded  and  honorable,  but  perhaps  rather  too 
sensitive  men.  By  the  one  ground  of  attack  the  governor 
was  loosing  men  of  elevated  and  cultivated  minds;  by  the 
other,  the  predilection  and  favor  of  that  part  of  the  repub- 
licans who  looked  too  much  at  the  surface  of  things,  and 
formed  their  opinions  rather  from  their  suspicions  and 
apprehensions  of  what  might  be,  than  on  evidence  of 
what  actually  was. 

Amidst  these  collisions  and  violent  struggles,  which  were 
little  better  than  a  mere  contest  for  office  and  its  emolu- 
ments between  citizens,  it  affords  me  pleasure  to  state  that 
the  common  school  system  received  great  improvement 
from  a  very  able  report  made  by  Mr.  Hawley,  the  superin- 
tendent, and  from  the  able  and  zealous  support  with  which 
his  recommendations  were  sustained  by  Gen.  Root  in  the 
assembly.  So  great  was  the  confidence  of  all  men  in 
Mr.  Hawley,  (a  confidence  richly  merited,)  that  during 
the  discussion  of  the  bill  in  the  assembly,  Mr.  H.  was  re- 
quired to  take  a  seat  with  the  members  and  occasionally 
make  verbal  explanations  of  the  objects  he  had  in  view, 
in  several  of  the  details  of  his  bill.  The  plan  proposed 
by  the  bill  which  became  a  law,was  very  judicious,  and  with 
the  alteration  recommended  for  two  successive  years  by 
Mr.  Spencer,  of  the  appointment  of  county  superinten- 
dents, which  was  adopted  by  the  legislature  of  1841,  con- 
stitutes substantially  our  present  common  school  system; 
a  system  which  is  as  nearly  perfect  as  one  can  be,  and  at 


492  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [IS  19. 

the  same  time  be  in  accordance  with  the  genius  of  our 
civil  institutions,  and  with  the  the  existing  state  of  so- 
ciety. 

When  the  bill  authorizing  the  commissioners  to  contract 
for  the  construction  of  the  whole  line  of  the  canals,  was  be- 
fore the  senate,  several  of  the  Clintonian  senators  opposed 
itj  or  rather  they  preferred  limiting  the  commissioners  to 
particular  sections,  in  order  that  a  demonstration  could  be 
furnished  of  the  practicability  of  the  work,  and  of  the 
actual  expenses  which  would  be  required  in  order  to  com- 
plete it.  We  (for  I  was  one  of  the  number,)  were  friends 
of  the  work,  but  we  believed  that  public  confidence  would 
be  better  preserved  by  this  cautious  course  than  by  invest- 
ing the  commissioners  at  once,  and  before  any  demonstra- 
tion had  been  afforded  of  the  practicability  of  the  scheme, 
with  the  power  to  incur  a  debt  in  the  name  of  the  state, 
of  from  five  to  ten  millions  of  dollars.  This  was  repre- 
sented by  the  Albany  Argus,  and  subsequently  in  a  pam- 
phlet written  by  B.  F.  Butler,  Esq.  as  opposition  to  the 
canal  J  and  further,  that  as  they  were  pleased  to  call  Mr. 
Barstow,  Mr.  Ross,  and  myself,  confidential  friends  of 
Mr.  Clinton,  they  attempted  an  inference  that  he  himself 
was  not  at  heart  desirous  of  a  speedy  completion  of  the 
work. 

The  following  extracts  from  the  Albany  Argus  and  Re- 
gister of  April,   1819,  will  enable  the  reader  to  arrive  at 
a  correct  conclusion  as  respects  these  proceedings: 
From  the  Albany  Argus. 

"  The  Canal  Law. — Taking  the  printed  bill  for  our 
data,  we  made  two  material  mistakes  in  our  last,  in  noti- 
cing this  subject.  The  law  authorizes  and  empowers  the 
commissioners  to  proceed  to  open  a  canal  communication 
between  the  Seneca  river  and  Lake  Erie,  betweed  Utica 
and  the  Hudson  river,  and  between  Fort  Edward  and  the 
navigable  waters  of  the  Hudson.     It  authorizes  an  annual 


1819.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  493 

loan  of  six  hundred  thousand  dollars  including  the  loan 
authorized  by  a  former  law. 

When  the  bill  was  under  discussion  in  the  senate,  Mr. 
Hammond  made  a  motion  to  strike  out  of  the  second  sec- 
tion so  much  as  authorizes  the  commencement  of  the  east- 
ern and  western  sections  of  the  Erie  Canal;  which  motion 
was  negatived,  twelve  to  sixteen,  as  follows: 

For  striking  out — Messrs.  Austin,  Barnum,  Barstow, 
Bowne,  Dayton,  Ditmis,  Hammond,  Livingston,  Louns- 
bury,  Noyes,  Ross,  Swart — twelve. 

Against  striking  out — Messrs.  Adams,  Allen,  Bates, 
Childs,  Evans,  Frey,  Hart,  Knox,  Mallery,  Rosekrants, 
Seymour,  Skinner,  Van  Buren,  Wilson,  Yates,  Young — 
sixteen. 

Mr.  Ross  then  moved  to  strike  out  so  much  as  author- 
izes the  commencement  of  the  section  between  Seneca 
river  and  Lake  Erie;  which  was  also  negatived — eighteen 
to  nine. 

Mr.  Hammond  then  made  a  motion  to  strike  out  so 
much  as  authorizes  the  commencement  of  the  section 
between  Utica  and  the  Hudson  river;  which  was  negatived, 
eleven  to  seventeen,  as  follows: 

Ayes — Messrs.  Allen,  Adams,  Austin,  Barnum,  Bar- 
stow,  Bowne,  Dayton,  Frey,  Hammond,  Noyes,  Swart — 
eleven. 

Nays — Messrs.  Bates,  Childs,  Ditmis,  Evans,  Hart, 
Knox,  Livingston,  Lounsbury,  Mallery,  Rosekrants,  Ross, 
Seymour,  Skinner,  Van  Buren,  Wilson,  Yates,  Young — 
seventeen. 

It  will  appear  evident  from  this  sketch  of  proceedings, 
that  the  canal  question  was  neither  advocated  nor  op- 
posed in  the  senate  on  political  grounds;  and  that  some 
of  Mr.  Clinton's  warmest  political  friends  were  the  most 
hostile  to  the  principles  of  the  bill." 


494  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1819. 

From  the  Albany  Register. 

"  The  bill  mentioned  in  the  article  we  have  extracted 
from  the  Argus  of  Tuesday  last,  authorizes  the  canal 
commissioners  to  contract  for  the  making  of  the  whole 
line  of  the  western  canal. 

When  Mr.  Hammond  made  the  motion  to  strike  out  of 
the  second  section  so  much  as  authorizes  the  immediate 
commencement  of  the  eastern  and  western  sections  of  the 
Erie  Canal,  he  stated  that  he  was  decidedly  in  favor  of 
prosecuting  the  great  work  of  connecting  the  waters  of 
Lake  Erie  with  the  Hudson  river  by  a  canal;  that  he  had 
not  a  shadow  of  doubt  but  that  this  great  object  would 
be  ultimately  accomplished;  that  he  had  full  confidence 
in  the  estimates  made  by  the  canal  commissioners,  and 
that  he  was  willing  as  one  of  the  members  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  furnish  the  means  of  accomplishing  this  splendid 
undertaking.  But,  he  said,  that  if  it  was  really  intended  to 
complete  the  work,  it  was  important  that  public  confi- 
dence in  its  practicability  should  be  preserved.  What  was 
the  best  means  of  preserving  that  confidence?  Canals,  it 
is  true,  are  common  in  Europe,  but  they  are  novel  in 
America.  The  people  wish  a  demonstration  of  the  prac- 
ticability and  utility  of  the  proposed  canals.  He  was 
therefore  of  opinion  that  the  completion  of  the  whole 
projected  system  of  internal  improvements  would  be  best 
ensured  by  confining  our  expenditures  to  the  northern  ca- 
nal and  middle  section  of  the  western  canal,  until  the 
northern  canal  and  middle  section  of  the  western  should 
be  completed  and  in  actual  operation.  With  this  view  he 
would  cheerfully  vote  to  authorize  the  commissioners  to 
borrow  any  sum  they  should  say  was  requisite  to  accom- 
plish those  objects. 

If  the  northern  canal  and  middle  section  of  the  western 
canal  were  completed,  and  the  state  in  the  receipt  of  the 
revenue  produced  by  the  tolls  from  those  sections,  could 


1819.1  OF    NEW-YORK.  495 

any  man  of  common  sense  entertain  a  doubt  but  that  the 
eastern  and  western  sections  of  the  Erie  canal  would  be 
finished?  He  thought  not,  and  therefore  made  his  motion 
to  strike  out. 

Mr.  Ross  stated  that  he  should  vote  for  striking  out,  for 
similar  reasons,  at  the  same  time  declaring  his  determina- 
tion to  persevere  until  the  whole  system  of  internal  im- 
provement should  be  carried  into  effect  and  completed. 

Our  readers  will  perceive  that  the  insinuation  of  op- 
position to  the  canal,  contained  in  the  concluding  para- 
graph, which  we  have  extracted  from  our  neighbor  Buel, 
is^not  only  incorrect  but  manifestly  unjust  as  respects  Mr. 
Ross  and  Mr.  Hammond,  and  such  of  their  political 
friends  as  voted  with  them." 

The  governor,  in  his  speech  at  the  commencement  of 
the  session,  was  silent  on  the  subject  of  a  convention  to 
amend  the  constitution;  but  Gen.  Root,  on  the  eighth  of 
February,  offered  a  resolution  in  the  assembly  for  the  call 
of  a  convention  with  unlimited  powers  to  revise,  alter,  or 
modify  the  constitution. 

This  resolution  called  forth  an  extended  and  very  able 
debate.  Mr.  Root  of  course  supported  it  with  his  usual 
ability,  and  he  was  seconded  by  Mr. Bacon  from  Oneida 
county,  in  a  very  able  argument.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  federalists  generally,  together  with  Mr.  Yates,  who 
made  a  very  handsome  argument,  opposed  the  resolu 
tion.  As  yet,  therefore,  there  was  no  decisive  indications 
that  the  call  of  a  convention  would  present  a  question 
which  would  be  decided  upon  party  principles. 

The  resolution  was  eventually  rejected. 

During  the  summer  of  1818,  Joseph  Elicott  had  re- 
signed his  office  of  canal  commissioner,  and  the  governor 
had,  in  pursuance  of  the  authority  vested  in  him  by  law, 
as  the  vacancy  happened  in  the  recess  of  the  legislature, 
appointed  senator  Hart  in  the  place  of  Mr.  Ellicott.    This 


496  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1819. 

appointment  was  exceedingly  judicious;  for  Mr.  Hart, 
whatever  his  defects  as  a  legislator  may  have  been,  was  a 
very  correct  business  man.  It  became  necessary  for  the 
legislature  before  the  session  expired,  to  pass  upon  this 
appointment,  as  the  appointment  of  Hart  would  expire 
on  the  adjournment  of  the  legislature. 

Mr.  Hart  being  naturally  a  man  of  ardent  feelings,  and 
having  formerly  entertained  strong  prejudices  against  the 
federal  party,  and  withal  being  a  very  indiscreet  man  in 
his  conversation,  was  personally  disliked  by  the  federal 
members  of  the  legislature.  The  Bucktails  had  fixed  upon 
Henry  Seymour,  who,  although  more  bitter  in  his  feel- 
ings towards  the  governor,  than  most  of  the  other 
members  of  his  party,  was  gentlemanly  and  courteous  in 
his  manners,  and  as  a  member  of  society,  highly  esteemed 
by  gentlemen  of  all  parties. 

The  moment  I  heard  who  the  opponent  of  Mr.  Hart 
was,  I  was  alarmed,  as  I  considered  Hart's  success  very 
doubtful.  I  immediately  mentioned  my  apprehensions  to 
Gov.  Clinton,  who  laughed  at  my  fears.  As  I  considered 
the  appointment  of  great  importance  in  a  political  point 
of  view;  I  called  upon  Mr.  Hart  and  advised  him  to  make 
a  thorough  canvass  of  the  members  of  both  houses,  and 
not  permit  the  election  to  come  on  until  he  had  obtained 
a  pledge  from  a  majority  of  the  members  that  they  would 
vote  for  him;  and  I  told  him,  I  thought  he  was  in  real 
danger  of  being  beaten.  He  was  so  sure  of  his  success 
that  he  was  angry  with  me  for  my  suspicion,  as  it  implied 
an  unfavorable  opinion  of  his  popularity.  Finding  that 
the  two  men  most  interested  were  indifferent,  I  gave  my- 
self no  further  trouble  about  the  matter.  The  Bucktails 
set  on  foot,  a  quiet  but  very  efficient  system  of  election- 
eering, mainly,  as  I  believe,  with  the  federalists.  I  could 
detail  some  of  their  operations,  but  I  apprehend  it  would 
fatigue,  more  than  it  would  amuse  the  reader. 


1819.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  497 

Mr.  Seymour  was  nominated  in  the  senate,  and  Mr. 
Hart  in  the  assembly.  Upon  joint  ballot  Mr.  Seymour 
was  chosen  by  a  majority  of  one  vote.  The  aggregate 
number  at  that  time  in  the  two  houses,  of  Clintonians  and 
and  federalists,  exceeded  ninety,  while  the  Bucktails  at  most 
could  not  count  to  exceed  fifty-seven.  Of  course  fifteen 
or  twenty  Clintonians  or  federalists,  must  on  joint  ballot, 
have  voted  for  Mr.  Seymour. 

The  result  of  the  contest  between  Seymour  and  Hart 
was  more  seriously  unfortunate,  and  proved  more  fatally 
injurious  to  the  Clintonian  party  than  many  of  them  at 
that  time  apprehended.  It  gave  the  Bucktails  a  majority 
in  the  board  of  acting  commissioners,  and  thus  threw  into 
their  hands  a  vast  amount  of  patronage ;  a  patronage 
which  was  felt  along  the  whole  line  of  country  from  Al 
bany  to  Lakes  Champlain  and  Erie.  Thus  the  political 
influence  which  grew  out  of  the  great  and  splendid  work 
which  Mr.  Clinton  had  labored  so  much  and  so  successful 
ly  to  cause  to  be  undertaken  by  the  state,  was  henceforth 
and  until  the  day  of  his  death  used  to  annoy  and  to  pros- 
trate him. 

Mr.  Buel,  in  announcing  this  result  in  the  Argus,  said: 
*'A  majority  of  the  canal  commissioners  are  now  politi- 
cally opposed  to  the  governor,  and  it  will  not  he  necessary 
for  a  person  who  wishes  to  obtain  employment  on  the  ca- 
nal as  agent ^  contractor ^  or  otherwise^  to  avow  hhnself  a 
Clintonian.  Did  Judge  Buel,  by  this  negative  allegation, 
intend  that  an  affirmative  allegation  was  to  be  inferred;  to 
wit,  that  in  future  it  would  be  necessary  for  a  person  de- 
siring to  become  a  contractor,  &c.,  to  avow  himself  an 
anti-Clintonian  1  I  hope  not;  and  yet  probably  some 
who  wished  to  become  agents,  &c.,  might  have  so  under- 
stood him. 

The  appointment  of  Chief  Justice  Thompson  secretary 

of  the  navy,  produced  another  vacancy  on  the  bench  of 

32 


498  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1819. 

the  supreme  court.  Judge  Spencer  was,  of  course,  ap- 
pointed chief  justice,  but  the  selection  of  a  junior  judge 
from  the  bar  presented  a  question  of  great  delicacy  and 
difficulty.  The  federalists  recommended,  and  pressed 
with  great  zeal,  Samuel  Jones,  son  of  the  late  comptroller, 
a  learned  lawyer  and  eminent  for  his  virtues  as  a  citizen, 
who  has  since  held  the  office  of  chancellor  of  the  state, 
and  is  now  chief  justice  of  the  superior  court  of  the  city 
of  New-York. 

On  the  other  hand,  John  Woodworth,  who  had  for 
several  years  been  attorney  general,  and  who  was  a  zeal- 
ous republican  friend  of  the  governor,  was  pressed  upon 
the  council  as  personally  unexceptionable  and  as  politically 
less  objectionable  than  Jones.  Mr.  Van  Buren  was  also 
mentioned  as  well  qualified  for  the  officej  but  I  am  not 
aware  that,  with  his  own  consent,  he  was  spoken  of  as  a 
candidate  for  any  appointment  by  that  council.  As  be- 
tween Mr.  Woodworth  and  Mr.  Jones,  a  question  was 
presented  which  produced  considerable  discussion  and 
excitement,  in  consequence  of  which  the  final  action  of 
the  council  was  long  delayed. 

About  this  time  a  project  was  formed  in  relation  to  the 
supreme  court,  which,  had  it  been  adopted,  would  have 
removed  the  difficulty  under  which  the  council  labored  on 
this  occasion. 

From  the  great  increase  of  the  state,  in  commerce  and 
population,  and  the  consequent  increase  of  litigation,  the 
supreme  court  had  already  become  overloaded  with  busi- 
ness. The  calendar  of  term  causes  began  to  increase  upon 
them;  and  as  they  were  obliged  to  try  in  the  respective 
counties,  all  the  issues  joined  in  the  supreme  court  and 
some  other  courts,  the  increase  of  the  number  of  counties, 
as  well  as  the  increase  of  litigation,  added  greatly  to  their 
labors  when  not  holding  a  court  in  bank.  Besides,  their 
presence  as  members  of  the  court  of  errors,  and  of  the 


ISVo.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  499 

council  of  revision,  required  their  attendance  at  Albany 
during  the  session  of  the  legislature.  It  was  most  evident 
that  five  men  must  sink  under  this  accumulation  of  labor. 
Suitors  began  to  complain  of  delays,  while  the  judges 
were  performing  as  much  labor  as  mortal  men  could  en- 
dure. More  force,  more  mm,  were  evidently  necessary 
to  do  the  work  which,  by  law,  was  assigned  to  the  su- 
preme court.  It  was  therefore  proposed  by  one  of  the 
Clintonian  members  of  the  senate,  that,  besides  filling  the 
vacancy  occasioned  by  the  resignation  of  Judge  Thompson, 
two  more  judges  should  be  appointed;  but  that  it  should 
not  be  required  that  more  than  five  judges  should  sit  du- 
ring term.  It  was  suggested  that  two  of  the  members  of 
the  court,  while  the  others  were  sitting  in  bank,  might  be 
employed  in  holding  circuits;  and  it  was  proposed  that  the 
three  new  judges  should  consist  of  Woodworth,  Jones  and 
Van  Buren.  I  am  not  authorised  to  say  that  Mr.  Van 
Buren  would  have  accepted  the  appointment,  but  I  have 
some  reason  to  believe  he  would  have  done  so.  He  ap- 
peared to  be  tired  of  the  eternal  political  struggles  to 
which  he  seemed  doomed,  and  such,  in  truth,  he  told  me 
was  the  fact.  The  probability  is,  that  if  at  that  moment 
the  office  of  judge  had  been  tendered  to  him,  he  would 
have  gladly  retired  from  political  contests,  and  employed 
the  great  powers  of  his  mind  in  the  discharge  of  his  offi- 
cial duties,  and  would  have  confined  his  ambition  to  the 
acquisition  of  distinction  and  fame  as  a  jurist. 

Had  this  scheme  been  adopted,  (if  one  may  be  allowed 
to  speculate  on  probabilities,)  it  is  reasonable  to  conjec- 
ture, that  the  then  existing  judicial  system  would  not  have 
been  broken  up;  that  Mr.  Clinton  would  have  been  sus- 
tained; and  that  probably  Mr.  Van  Buren  never  would 
have  been  president  of  the  United  States.  It  must  be  con- 
fessed, that  one  object  of  the  proposer  of  this  plan,  was  to 
get  Mr.  Van  Buren  out  of  the  legislature,  and  detach  him 


600  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1819. 

from  the  active  management  of  the  party  of  which  he  was 
the  life  and  soul. 

The  project  failed  of  obtaining  the  approbation  of  the 
governor  and  his  friendsj  and,  strange  to  say,  the  judges 
of  the  supreme  court  were,  I  was  told,  unanimously  oppo- 
sed to  it.  Why  should  they  have  been  so  1  The  plan,  if 
adopted,  would  render  their  duties  less  onerous;  their 
salaries  would  not  have  been  diminished.  The  appoint- 
ment of  Mr.  Jones  would  have  increased  the  confidence  in 
the  court,  of  the  great  federal  party;  the  appointment  of 
Van  Buren  would  have  had  the  same  effect  on  the  Buck- 
tail  party — a  party,  which,  after  the  resignation  of  Judge 
Thompson,  could  hardly  be  said  to  be  represented  in  that 
important  branch  of  the  government;  and  the  appointment 
of  Woodworth  would  have  satisfied  the  republican  friends 
of  the  governor.  Why,  then,  did  the  judges  of  the  su- 
preme court  so  promptly  reject  the  proposed  alteration  ? 

Man  loves  power.  The  judges  did  not  fail  to  see,  that 
if  you  divide  a  given  quantum  of  power  between  seven 
men,  the  quantity  of  power,  held  by  each,  will  be  less 
than  when  you  divide  the  same  quantum  between  five. 

Mr.  Woodworth  was  eventually  appointed. 

There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  the  Bucktails  set- 
tled on  Gov.  Tompkins,  during  this  winter,  for  their  can- 
didate for  governor,  in  1820,  in  opposition  to  Mr.  Clinton. 
He  was,  personally,  more  popular  than  any  other  man  of 
any  party.  The  old  Tammany  men,  of  the  southern  dis- 
trict, preferred  him  to  any  other  candidate.  Mr.  Van 
Buren  wished  to  unite  the  largest  possible  number  of  the 
old  republican  party  in  the  state,  against  Mr.  Clinton,  and 
he  believed  that  no  name  could  be  so  effectual  in  rallying 
the  old  war  party  as  that  of  Gov.  Tompkins;  while  his 
flexibility  of  temper,  and  apparent  frankness,  he  hoped, 
instead  of  repelling,  would  invite  that  portion  of  the  fede- 
ralists who  had  manifested  hostile  feelings  towards  Gov. 


i 


1819.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  501 

Clinton,  to  rally  around  Tompkins,  and  yield  him  their 
support.  In  all  these  respects,  the  selection  of  Governor 
Tompkins  was  extremely  judicious.  But  there  was  one 
circumstance  against  him.  From  the  books  of  the  comp- 
troller it  appeared  that  he,  to  a  very  large  amount,  was  a 
defaulter. 

Gov.  Tompkins,  during  the  last  war,  had  been,  not  only 
the  agent  and  executive  of  the  state,  but  he  had  been  the 
agent  of  the  general  government.  Immense  sums  of  mo- 
ney had  been  received  and  paid  out  by  him,  for  both  go- 
vernments. When  the  credit  of  the  general  government 
was  low,  he  had,  in  some  instances,  on  his  personal  re- 
sponsibility, in  connection  with  the  credit  he  had  in  con- 
sequence of  his  official  station  as  governor  of  the  state, 
raised  large  sums  of  money,  which  had  been  expended  in 
the  service  of  the  general  government  for  the  defence  of 
the  state.  He  had  also,  no  doubt  in  good  faith,  paid  out 
in  the  aggregate  large  sums  of  money  belonging  to  the 
state,  to  officers  of  the  state  and  national  government, 
which  moneys  had  not  been  accounted  for,  either  to  Gov. 
Tompkins,  or  the  proper  accounting  officers  of  the  state 
and  national  governments.  Gov.  Tompkins  was  not  a 
methodical  business  man,  and  his  accounts  and  vouchers 
were  not  in  a  condition  to  bear  a  rigid  scrutiny.  Under 
these  circumstances,  a  bill  was  introduced  into  the  legisla- 
ture, and  passed  both  houses,  {Session  Laws  of  1819,  p. 
286,)  requiring  the  comptroller  to  liquidate  and  settle  the 
residue  of  the  accounts  of  Daniel  D.  Tompkins,  and,  on 
such  settlement,  to  allow  him  the  same  discount  or  pre- 
mium on  the  amount  of  monies  borrowed  by  him,  on  his 
personal  responsibility,  and  expended  in  the  public  ser- 
vice, as  were  allowed  toother  individuals  and  bodies  poli- 
tic for  their  agency  fees  in  such  transactions;  that  the 
comptroller  should  charge  the  sum,  so  allowed,  to  the 
United  States;    and  that,  upon  such  final  settlement,  the 


502  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [IS  19. 

treasurer  pay  the  late  governor  the  balance,  if  any  were 
his  due. 

The  comptroller,  by  another  section,  "was  required  to 
credit  the  governor  with  all  payments  made  by  him  accord- 
ing to  law,  and  to  open  an  account  with  the  persons  to 
whom  the  governor  had  advanced  the  money,  and  require 
them  to  account  to  the  state  for  its  expenditure.  This  bill 
passed  both  houses  without  much  opposition.  Mr.  Tib- 
bits,  in  the  senate,  thought  he  discovered  something  wrong 
in  itj  but  it  finally  passed  that  body  nearly  unanimously. 
Undoubtedly  Mr.  Van  Buren,  and  his  leading  friends, 
considered  the  passage  of  this  law  of  very  great  political 
importance.  It  is  not  probable  that  they,  or  even  Gov. 
Tompkins,  at  that  time,  knew  how  his  accounts  would 
stand  if  they  were  correctly  settled.  This  bill  relieved 
them,  in  a  great  measure,  from  the  embarrassing  charge 
they  apprehended  against  Gov.  Tompkins  as  a  defaulter. 
If,  upon  a  fair  settlement,  upon  the  liberal  terms  contem- 
plated by  the  act,  Gov.  Tompkins  should  be  able  to  bal 
ance  his  account  with  the  state,  then  the  objection  to  him 
as  a  defaulter  would  no  longer  exist.  If,  according  to  the 
views  of  the  accounting  officer  of  the  state,  there  would 
still  remain  a  balance  due  from  Gov.  Tompkins,  these 
disputed  items  might  be  claimed,  and  a  difference  of  opin- 
ion, as  to  the  construction  of  the  act,  might  be  started^ 
which  would  prevent  a  final  adjustment  of  the  balance, 
either  one  way  or  the  other,  until  after  the  election  in 
April,  1820. 

The  annual  election  of  senators  and  members  of  assem- 
bly was  now  approaching,  and  each  party  took  the  field 
with  great  spirit.  The  federalists,  in  counties  where  they 
had  a  clear  majority,  as  in  Columbia,  Oneida,  Albany,  &c., 
supported  candidates  who  had  uniformly  belonged  to  that 
party.  In  counties  where  they  were  in  the  minority  they 
generally  supported  Clintonian  candidates.     The  middle 


1S19.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  ^*  503 

district  presented  a  singular  state  of  things.  By  this  time 
it  was  well  ascertained,  that  a  very  great  majority  of  the 
republicans  of  that  district  were  opposed  to  Mr,  Clinton. 
But  the  Clintonians  and  federalists  united,  constituted  a 
majority,  and  even  then  but  a  small  majority,  over  the  ad- 
verse party. 

The  Bucktail  party  had  nominated  Charles  E.  Dudley 
of  Albany,  and  John  T.  Moore  of  Delaware,  and  the  Clin- 
tonians had  nominated  Elisha  Jenkins  of  Albany,  and 
Arunah  Metcalf  of  Otsego.  The  candidates  on  both  sides 
were,  personally,  men  of  good  reputation  and  entirely  un- 
objectionable. My  reader  will  also  bear  in  mind,  that  if 
any  considerable  portion  of  the  federal  or  Clintonian 
strength  should  be  diverted  from  the  Clintonian  ticket,  it 
would  ensure  the  success  of  their  opponents.  Under 
these  circumstances  Solomon  Southwick,  a  self-nominated 
candidate,  claimed  the  support  of  the  old  Clintonians  of 
the  district;  and  Abraham  Van  Vechten — the  respectable 
and  justly  esteemed  and  venerable  Abraham  VanVechten — 
allowed  himself  to  be  a  candidate  to  draw  off  the  votes  of 
a  few  old  federalists  who  would  not  vote  for  a  democrat 
if  a  federal  name  was  before  them.  Mr.  Southwick  chal- 
lenged and  obtained  the  support  of  the  ultra  Clintonians, 
and  Mr.  Van  Vechten  of  the  ultra  federalists.  Mr.  South- 
wick, whose  conduct  never  seemed  to  have  been  governed 
by  any  system  or  fixed  rule  of  action,  may  have  been  in- 
duced to  pursue  this  course  from  mere  personal  hostility 
^■•to  Judge  Spencer  and  Mr.  Jenkins,  and  perhaps  from  re- 
sentment to  Mr.  Clinton;  but  Mr.  Van  Vechten  must 
have  been  governed  by  other  motives.  He,  knowing,  as 
he  did,  that  he  could  not  be  elected,  must  have  lent  his 
name  for  the  express  purpose  of  securing  the  success  of 
Messrs.  Dudley  and  Moore,  two  candidates  who  chal- 
lenged support  on  the  ground  that  they  were  in  favor  of 
an  eternal  war  upon  federalists  and  federalism. 


504  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1819. 

Eventually,  Mr.  Van  Vechten  received  two  thousand 
two  hundred  and  twenty-six  federal  votes,  and  Mr.  South- 
wick  one  thousand  and  fourteen  Clintonian  votes,  which 
caused  the  election  of  Messrs.  Dudley  and  Moore,  over 
Messrs.  Jenkins  and  Metcalf. 

Before  the  adjournment  of  the  legislature  an  address  of 
the  Clintonian  members  was  drawn,  signed  and  published. 
Although  it  was  written  for  effect,  shortly  before  an  elec- 
tion, and  must  be  presumed,  on  that  account,  to  present 
the  most  favorable  view  of  the  history  of  the  proceedings 
in  the  winter  of  1819,  as  respects  the  Clintoniansj  yet  I 
am  quite  sure  the  facts  it  contains  are  substantially  cor- 
rect j  and  I  think  it  presents  pretty  clearly  the  points  in 
difference  between  the  two  parties.  The  intention  of  the 
author,  was  to  avoid  any  abuse  of  the  adverse  party,  and 
all  unnecessary  eulogy  on  the  governor. 

Although  this  address,  as  originally  drawn  and  finally 
published,  met,  I  believe,  with  the  cordial  approbation  of 
those  who  subscribed  it,  yet  I  was  mortified  to  be  informed 
that  it  was  not  sufficiently  laudatory  of  Gov.  Clinton  to 
suit  the  taste  of  many  of  his  New- York  friends;  among 
whom,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  were  two  young  gentlemen  of 
some  talents  as  writers,  then  lately  from  New-Hampshire. 
The  gentlemen,  to  whom  I  allude,  were  N.  H.  Carter, 
who  had  recently  taken  the  editorial  management  of  the 
Albany  Register,  and  Charles  G.  Haines  of  the  city  of 
New-York. 

If  any  one  should  take  the  trouble  of  reading  the  ad- 
dress, about  which  I  have  perhaps  already  said  too  much, 
he  will  naturally  enquire  why  nothing  was  said  in  it  about 
the  election  of  speaker.  The  answer  is,  that  nothing 
could  be  said  in  justification  of  the  conduct  of  the  Clinto- 
nian party  on  that  occasion. 


1819.J  OF     NEW-YORK.  505 

The  republican  members  of  the  legislature,  who  were 
opposed  to  Gov.  Clinton,  also  addressed  the  citizens  of 
the  state,  setting  forth  the  causes  of  their  opposition. 
This  document  was,  I  have  reason  to  believe,  written  by 
William  L.  Marcy.  It  was  drawn  up  with  great  ability, 
and  like  all  his  other  writings,  was  a  production  clothed 
in  a  style  highly  finished  and  elegant.  It  was  my  inten- 
tion to  have  republished  this  address  also,  with  a  view  of 
showing  the  points  of  difference  between  the  two  parties 
as  exhibited  at  the  time  by  themselves,  but  I  have  been 
unable  to  find  it. 

The  result  of  the  election,  in  April,  was  a  gain  to  the  ^ 
Bucktail  party.     There  were,  nevertheless,  in  the  assem- 
bly, including  the  Clintonian  federalists,  a  majority  re- 
turned in  favor  of  the  governor. 

In  the  senate,  from  the  southern  district,  Peter  R.  Liv- 
ingston and  John  Townsend  were  elected,  in  opposition 
to  James  Talmadge  and  Pierre  Van  Cortland,  who  were 
the  Clintonian  candidates.  From  the  middle,  Charles  E. 
Dudley  and  John  T.  Moore.  From  the  eastern,  Benjamin 
Moers,  Duncan  McMartin  and  Thomas  Frothinghamj  and 
from  the  western,  Gideon  Granger  and  Lyman  Paine,  in 
opposition  to  Philetus  Swift  and  Nathaniel  Garrow,  the 
Bucktail  candidates. 

The  first  named  four  gentlemen  were  elected  as  oppo- 
nents, and  the  last  five  as  supporters  of  Mr.  Clinton's  ad- 
ministration. 


506  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1319. 


CHAPTER   XXV. 

FROM  MAY  1,  1819,  TO  MAY  1,  1820. 

Before  the  council  of  appointment  adjourned  in  April, 
1819,  they  issued  new  general  commissions  of  the  peace 
to  several  counties  of  the  state,  and  in  the  selections  to 
office,  seem  to  have  been  guided  very  much  by  political 
considerations.  The  new  appointments  were  made  almost 
exclusively  from  the  friends  of  the  governor,  many  of 
whom  were  federalists,  and  those  left  out  of  the  commis- 
sion were  chiefly  of  that  class  of  politicians  called  Euck- 
tails. 

The  removal  of  Richard  Riker,  recorder  of  New-York, 
produced  considerable  excitement.  Although  an  old 
friend  of  the  governor;  yet  from  the  time  that  Mr.  Clin- 
ton's friend  (Townsend)  had  refused  to  second  his  nomina- 
tion to  the  office  of  judge  of  the  supreme  court  in  pre- 
ference to  that  of  Jonas  Piatt,  he  had  been  as  bitter,  as  a 
man  of  his  pliable  and  apparent  courteous  exterior  could 
be,  in  his  opposition  to  the  Clintonians.  Peter  A.  Jay, 
was  the  man  whom  the  bar  and  the  substantial  citizens  of 
New-York  required  should  be  made  recorder.  His  high 
attainments  as  a  lawyer,  the  purity  of  his  morals,  and 
his  pre-eminent  standing  as  a  man  of  integrity  and  hon- 
or, obviously  indicated  him,  as,  aside  from  former  politi- 
cal prejudices,  the  most  suitable  man  for  the  office.  The 
council,  however,  hesitated  long  before  they  consented  to 
his  appointment,  solely  and  exclusively  on  the  ground 
that  he  was  a  federalist;  and,  (what  surely  to  an  Ameri- 
can patriot  ought  not  to  have  constituted  an  objection,) 
that  he  was  the  son  of  the  late  Governor  Jay.  For  my 
part,  although  my  prejudices  were  as  strong  against  the 


1819.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  507 

federal  party,  as  those  of  any  man;  yet  I  considered  that 
whether  by  our  own  wrong,  or  in  accordance  with  our 
duty,  we  had  placed  ourselves  in  a  condition  in  which 
it  was  not  only  our  interest,  but  duty,  to  select  our 
officers  from  those  who  were  most  worthy,  who  were  de- 
termined to  support  the  re-election  of  the  governor,  irre- 
spective of  the  political  parties  to  which  they  had  formerly 
belonged.  Doct.  Barstow,  and  several  other  republicans 
of  the  old  school,  entertained  the  same  opinion,  and  there- 
fore advised  the  appointment  of  Mr.  Jay.  He  was  ap- 
pointed. 

In  July,  the  council  again  met.  Although  the  removal 
of  minor  office-holding  Bucktails  and  the  appointment  of 
Clintonians  had  been  very  general;  yet  Mr.  Van  Buren, 
who  stood  at  the  head  of  the  opposition  to  the  governor, 
and  led  on  the  attack,  had  been  allowed  to  hold  one  of 
the  most  important,  influential  and  at  that  time  lucrative 
oflices  in  the  state,  the  ofl^ice  of  attorney  general,  undis- 
turbed. It  was  urged  that  this  inconsistency  in  the  con- 
duct of  the  administration  ought  to  be  obviated;  and  af- 
ter much  and  long  hesitation  the  council  removed  him,  and 
appointed  Thomas  J.  Oakley  in  his  place.  Upon  the 
principle  I  have  just  laid  down,  (whether  it  was  correct  or 
not,  is  another  question,)  there  could  be  no  reasonable 
objection  to  Mr.  Oakley's  appointment.  He  was  an  able 
lawyer,  and  in  all  respects  admitted  to  be  competent. 
Mr.  Van  Buren,  according  to  the  maxims  which  before 
had,  and  since  have  governed  his  political  conduct,  had 
no  right  to  complain,  and  in  fact,  I  believe,  he  did  not; 
but  an  outcry  was  of  course  raised  in  the  newspapers,  on 
account  of  the  removal  of  a  republican  from  an  important 
office,  and  the  appointment  of  a  federalist  in  his  place. 
The  appointment  of  Mr.  Jay  and  Mr.  Oakley,  did,  in  fact, 
more  effectually  identify  Mr.  Clinton  and  his  republican 


508  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1919. 

friends  with  the  federalists  than  any  act  which  had  before 
been  done. 

During  this  summer  a  controversy  arose  between  the 
vice-president,  Tompkins,  and  the  comptroller,  Archibald 
Mclntyre,  growing  out  of  a  difference  of  opinion  in  rela- 
tion to  the  construction  of  the  act  for  the  settlement  of  the 
accounts  of  the  former  with  the  state,  which  was  passed 
on  the  13th  April,  1819,  in  which  both  political  parties 
ardently  engaged,  and  which  agitated  the  whole  com- 
munity, and  increased  in  heat  and  bitterness  until  after  the 
election  in  April,  1820. 

I  shall  not  attempt  to  give  in  detail  the  particulars  of 
this  controversy,  but  merely  state  the  conclusions  to 
which  I  have  arrived,  from  my  knowledge  and  participa- 
tion in  the  controversy  while  it  existed;  and  more  espe- 
cially from  a  careful  re-examination,  recently  made,  of 
the  documents  in  relation  to  it.  If  I  shall  have  run  into 
errors,  those  errors  may  be  readily  corrected  by  the  docu- 
ments contained  in  the  printed  journals  of  the  two  houses 
of  the  legislature. 

During  the  preparation  for  the  late  war  with  Great 
Britain,  and  during  that  war,  the  state  and  national  go- 
vernments had  placed  at  the  disposition  of  the  late  gover- 
nor several  millions  of  dollars,  to  be  expended  under  his 
direction,  and  for  which  he  was,  of  course,  called  on  to 
account. 

He  was  irregular  and  immethodical  in  business;  not  sys- 
tematical in  keeping  his  accounts;  employed  too  many 
agents;  mingled  his  own  private  funds  with  those  of  the 
public;  was  naturally  careless  about  money,  and  some- 
times profuse  in  his  expenses.  The  novelty  of  a  state  of 
"war,  and  the  hurry  and  bustle  incident  to  that  state,  in- 
creased the  confusion  in  which  his  accounts  were  involved. 
No  candid  man  ever  charged  him  with  intentional  dishon- 
esty in  his  pecuniary  transactions. 


1S19.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  509 

The  comptroller  was  one  of  the  most  amiable  and  ex- 
cellent of  men.  A  rigidly  honest,  strictly  correct  and  able 
accountant,  and  assiduous  and  unremitting  in  his  attention 
to  his  public  duties. 

Upon  the  final  adjustment  of  the  accounts  of  the  vice* 
president,  from  the  vouchers  presented  to  the  comptroller, 
though  the  precise  state  of  the  accounts  was  not  ascer- 
tained, there  was  supposed,  in  1816,  to  be  a  balance  of 
one  hundred  and  ten  thousand  or  one  hundred  and  twenty 
thousand  dollars  of  the  public  money  in  the  hands  of  the 
vice-president,  for  which  he  could  not  legally  account. 
This  deficiency  was  supposed  to  be,  and  I  believe  it  to  be, 
owing,  not  to  an  intentional  appropriation  by  him  of  the 
money  of  the  state  to  his  own  use,  but  to  the  casual  loss 
of  vouchers;  to  the  payment  of  money,  in  many  cases, 
when,  in  the  hurry  and  bustle  of  the  times,  no  vouchers 
at  all  were  taken;  to  the  infidelity  and  knavery  of  agents; 
and,  perhaps,  as  he  mingled  his  own  money  with  that  of 
the  public,  to  his  sometimes  expending  for  domestic  pur- 
poses more  than  his  income,  and  thereby,  unintentionally, 
using  for  private  purposes  the  public  funds. 

With  views  somewhat  similar,  as  I  presume,  to.  those  I 
have  suggested  as  my  own,  in  the  year  1818,  the  legisla- 
ture, by  resolution,  referred  the  settlement  of  the  vice- 
president's  accounts  to  William  A.  Bayard,  Cadwallader 
D.  Golden  and  Robert  Bogardus,  who  were  directed  to 
adjust  them  upon  principles  of  equity,  without  regarding 
the  technical  rules  by  which  the  regular  accounting  offi- 
cers of  the  state  were  governed.  Mr.  Bayard  declined 
acting  as  a  commissioner,  but  the  vice-president  submitted 
his  claims  to  Messrs.  Colden  and  Bogardus.  These  claims 
consisted  of  commissions  on  $1,075,021.72  drawn  and 
expended  and  accounted  for  to  the  state,  and  for  risk 
and  responsibility  for  officers  and  agents,  to  whom  the 


510  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1819. 

money  had  been  confided,  expenses,  journeys,  &c.,  at  five 

per  cent, $53,751  98 

To  commissions  on  $2,363,516 .  27,  obtained 

from  the  United  States,  and  upon  per 

sonal  loans  and  advances,  expended  and 

accounted  for, $118,175  80 

To  premium  on  discount  of  $1,095,000.00 

at  twenty  per  cent,  in  stock,  being  the  , 

amount   loaned    on    the  vice-president's 

personal     responsibility,   and    advanced 

and  accounted   for, $277,506  00 

These  claims,  together  with  the  interest  on 

the  several  items,  amounted  to  upward  of  $600,000  00 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  vice-president  expected 
or  requested  that  the  whole  of  these  claims  should  be 
allowed  him  by  the  commissioners j  on  the  contrary,  they 
were  presented  to  enable  the  commissioners  to  select 
out  of  them  such  claims  as,  in  their  judgment,  were  the 
most  equitable,  which  would  amount  to  a  sum  sufficient 
to  enable  the  vice-president  to  balance  his  account  with 
the  state.  As  Mr.  Bayard  refused  to  act,  the  commission- 
ers were  incapable  of  making  any  decision  which  would 
be  binding  on  the  state.  Messrs.  Golden  and  Bogardus, 
however,  made  a  report  to  the  legislature,  in  1819,  in 
which  they  pronounced  an  eloquent  eulogium  on  the  vice- 
president,  and  recommended  that  a  liberal  allowance  be 
made  to  him.  In  justice  to  the  vice-president,  and  to  the 
honor  of  the  commissioners,  it  is  proper  to  bear  in  mind, 
that  they  were  politically  opposed  to  Gov.  Tompkins. 
The  report  of  the  commissioners,  in  1819,  was  referred  to 
a  joint  committee  of  the  two  houses,  who  unanimously 
arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  a  sufficient  sum  ought  to  be 
allowed  the  vice-president  to  enable  him  to  balance  his  ac- 
count with  the  state.  The  committee  ascertained  that  the 
balance  due  from  the  late  governor  was  about  one  hun- 


1819.  j  OF    NEW-YORK.  5ll 

dred  and  twenty  thousand  dollars.  Believing  that  he  had 
been  a  faithful  officer;  that  the  defalcation  was  owing  to 
the  extraordinary  state  of  the  times;  to  unintentional  error 
and  misfortune,  rather  than  to  intentional  deviation  from 
duty;  andj  as  Mr.  Tompkins  held  the  second  office 
in  the  nation,  from  delicacy  towards  him,  the  com 
mittee  were  unwilling  to  recommend  the  passage  of 
an  act  which,  on  its  face,  would  imply  that  he  was  a  de- 
faulter. They  therefore  selected  an  item,  contained  in  his 
schedule,  of  about  a  million  of  dollars,  consisting  of  cur- 
rent money  which  had  been  raised  by  Gov.  Tompkins 
during  the  war,  on  the  pledge  of  United  States  stock  and 
treasury  notes,  and  on  his  personal  responsibility,  for  de- 
fraying the  expenses  of  carrying  on  the  war,  on  which  to 
allow  him  a  premium  equal  to  that  paid  by  the  United 
States  to  their  own  agents  for  converting  treasury  notes, 
and  their  depreciated  stocks,  into  current  money.  The 
premium  was  understood  to  be,  as  stated  in  a  letter  from 
Mr.  Bacon,  one  of  the  joint  committee,  about  twelve  per 
cent.  They  probably  selected  that  item  because  twelve 
per  cent  on  a  million  of  dollars  would  produce  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  thousand  dollars,  supposed  to  be  the  pre- 
cise balance  due  from  the  vice-president.  The  joint  com- 
mittee accordingly  recommended,  and  the  legislature 
passed,  the  law  of  the  13th  April,  1819,  as  I  have  stated 
in  the  preceding  chapter. 

When  the  vice-president  presented  his  claim,  under  this 
act,  to  the  comptroller,  he  furnished  him  with  certificates 
from  Doct.  Isaac  Brunson,  Prime,  Ward  &  Sands,  and 
other  dealers  in  stock,  showing  that  the  difference  in  value 
between  treasury  notes  and  United  States  stock,  and  cur- 
rent money,  in  the  year  1814,  was  about  twenty-five  per 
cent.  This  would  have  entitled  the  vice-president  to  the 
sum  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars,  Jror  a  pre- 
mium on  the  one  million  of  dollars  raised  by  him,  and 


512  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1819. 

therefore  would,  besides  balancing  his  account,  have  au- 
thorized him  to  demand  a  payment  from  the  state  treasury 
of  about  one  hundred  and  thirty  thousand  dollars.  The 
comptroller  was  alarmed  at  this  demand.  He  knew  it 
was  directly  contrary  to  the  intentions  of  the  joint  com- 
mittee who  reported  the  bill,  and  the  legislature  which 
passed  itj  and  he  finally  resorted  to  a  construction  of  the 
act  highly  technical  and  rigid,  and  as  foreign  to  the  real 
intention  of  the  legislature  as  was  the  amount  of  what  he 
supposed  to  be,  and  probably  what  was  intended  to  be, 
(or  why  should  he  have  produced  the  certificates  of  Doct. 
Benson  and  others  1)  the  vice-president's  claim.  The  act 
awarded  to  the  vice-president  a  premium  on  all  moneys 
borrowed  "  on  his  personal  responsibility y^  which  the 
comptroller  construed  to  mean  on  his  personal  responsibili- 
ty alone;  and  therefore,  where  treasury  notes  or  stock 
were  pledged  jointly  with  his  responsibility,  the  comp- 
troller refused  to  allow  the  premium.  This  construction, 
in  effect,  nullified  the  act. 

The  vice-president  fortified  his  claim  by  the  written 
opinion  of  several  of  the  most  eminent  lawyers  in  the 
state.  On  the  other  hand,  the  comptroller  offered  to  sub- 
mit the  question  to  the  judges  of  the  supreme  court;  to 
them  and  the  chancellorj  or  to  the  judges,  chancellor  and 
attorney  generalj  or  to  the  chancellor,  chief  justice  and 
attorney  generalj  or,  he  proposed,  that  the  vice-president 
should  apply  to  the  supreme  court  for  a  mandamus  against 
him,  which  would  necessarily  require  that  court  to  pro- 
nounce officially  their  opinion  on  the  construction  of  the 
act  in  question.  The  vice-president  declined  to  accede  to 
any  of  these  propositions,  but,  it  is  proper  to  state,  that  in 
each  of  the  ways  for  deciding  the  question,  proposed  by 
the  comptroller,  the  decision  would  have  been  made  by  a 
tribunal,  a  majority  of  the  persons  composing  which  were 
politically  adverse  to  Mr.  Tompkins. 


1819.]  OF     NEW- YORK.  513 

The  negotiations  between  the  parties  finally  terminvcted 
in  the  month  of  August,  neither  party  being  willing  to 
yield  to  the  other.  After  it  had  been  agreed  that  no  set- 
tlement could  be  made,  according  to  the  statement  of  the 
comptrollerj  and  not  denied  by  the  vice-president,  he  pro- 
posed that  his  account  should  be  balanced,  and  to  accept 
of  twenty-five  thousand  dollars  as  the  balance  due  him 
under  the  act  of  I8l9j  but  the  comptroller,  having  com- 
mitted himself  in  relation  to  the  construction  of  the  act, 
refused  to  accede  to  the  proposition. 

The  comptroller,  not  long  after,  published,  in  the  form 
of  a  letter,  addressed  to  the  vice-president,  a  detailed 
statement  of  the  controversy,  to  which  Gov.  Tompkins 
replied  in  a  very  able  and  eloquent  communication  which 
was  published  and  circulated  all  over  the  state.  The 
comptroller  subsequently  replied  to  this  communication, 
and  his  reply  was  also  published,  and  had  an  equally  ex- 
tensive circulation.  This  correspondence  was  conducted, 
although  with  much  asperity,  with  great  tact  and  ability 
on  both  sides.  The  comptroller  proved  himself,  not  only 
a  distinguished  and  able  accountant,  but  a  talented  and 
accomplished  writer.  The  letter  of  the  vice-president  is 
a  splendid  production.  Shortly  before  its  publication, 
Mr.  Van  Buren  spent  several  days  with  Gov.  Tompkins. 
Although  the  style  of  this  letter  is  more  florid  than  gene- 
rally characterizes  the  composition  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  I 
have  good  reasons  to  believe  that  he  was  its  real  author. 
But,  by  whomsoever  it  may  have  been  written,  it  affords 
evidence  that  the  talents  of  its  author  were  of  the  highest 
order. 

These  proceedings,  and  the  correspondence  which 
grew  out  of  them,  occupied,  mainly,  the  public  attention, 
until  the  meeting  of  the  legislature. 

The  advantage  derived  from  the  great  personal  populari- 
ty of  Gov.  Tompkins  was  nearly  balanced  by  the  universal 

33 


514  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [l820. 

confidence  entertained  by  all  parties  in  the  integrity  and 
purity  ot  the  motives  of  Mr.  Mclntyre.  In  private  life 
all  men  admired  and  loved  him,  and  in  the  discharge  of 
the  highly  responsible  duties  of  the  office  of  comptroller 
for  many  years,  and  under  various  administrations,  he  had 
afforded  such  proof  of  his  fidelity  to  the  state  that  no  man, 
even  in  those  times,  ventured  to  charge  him  with  inten- 
tional error. 

The  legislature  met  early  in  January,  1820,  vi'hen  John 
C.  Spencer,  of  Ontario  county,  was  chosen  speaker  by  the 
joint  votes  of  the  Clintonians  and  federalists.  Mr.  Spen- 
cer received  sixty-four  votes,  Peter  Sharpe  fifty,  (probably 
the  whole  Bucktail  vote,)  and  there  were  seven  scattering 
votes.  The  assembly,  at  this  time,  contained  a  prodigious 
array  of  talent.  In  the  senate  the  most  distinguished  new 
member  was  Gideon  Granger,  the  late  post-master  gene- 
ral. He,  beyond  question,  was  one  of  New-England's 
most  talented  sons,  but  a  long  course  of  active  life,  and 
rather  too  much  indulgence  in  living,  had  impaired  his 
health,  which,  together  with  his  advanced  age,  rendered 
him  not  fitted  for  the  new  theatre  on  which  he  was  now 
called  to  act. 

In  consequence  of  a  failure  to  elect  a  senator  of  the 
United  States  by  the  last  legislature,  the  state  was  now 
but  partially  represented  in  one  branch  of  the  national 
government,  and  therefore  the  attention  of  the  present 
legislature  was  early  called  to  that  subject.  It  will  be 
recollected,  that  in  the  autumn  of  I818,  and  early  part  of 
the  year  1819,  the  honest  republicans  of  the  state  were 
alarmed  at  the  report  that  Mr.  Clinton  was  about  to  be- 
tray the  republican  interest  of  the  state  by  procuring  the 
re-election  of  Rufus  King  to  the  senate  of  the  United 
States.  What,  then,  will  be  the  surprise  of  the  reader, 
when  he  is  informed  that  the  very  men  who  encouraged 
the  circulation  of  these  heinous  charges  against  Mr.  Clin- 


1820.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  615 

tcDjin  less  tnan  twelve  months  afterwards  came  out  open- 
ly and  decidedly  in  favor  of  Mr.  King,  and  alleged  as  the 
reasons  for  their  support,  the  conduct  of  Mr.  King  during 
the  late  war,  and  in  the  senate  of  the  United  States,  which 
were  equally  as  well  known  to  them  in  December,  1818, 
as  in  December,  1819,  and,  as  a  further  reason,  that  he 
and  his  friends  had  the  merit  of  being  opposed  to  Mr. 
Clinton  !     Yet  it  was  even  so. 

Shortly  before  the  meeting  of  the  legislature  a  pamphlet 
was  circulated  from  Albany,  addressed  and  sent  through 
the  post-office  to  all  the  republican  members  of  the  legis- 
lature, in  favor  of  the  nomination  and  election,  by  the  re- 
publican party,  of  Rufus  King.  This  pamphlet  was  the 
joint  production  of  Mr.  Van  Buren  and  Gov.  Marcy,  and 
of  course  was  well  written. 

The  pamphlet  admitted  Mr.  King  to  be  a  federalist, 
but  it  divided  the  federalists  into  three  classes,  as  their 
political  characters  were  developed  during  the  late  war. 

The  first  class,  it  alleged,  consisted  of  men  who  had 
imbibed  strong  predilections  for  the  common  enemy,  and 
who  were  so  inflamed  by  party  malignity  and  heated  by 
ambition,  as  to  be  determined  to  rule  or  ruin. 

The  second,  were  drilled  party  men,  who  thought  the 
war  impolitic,  and  therefore  opposed  the  administration; 
and  the  third  class  were  men  who,  although  opposed  to 
the  men  who  controlled  the  national  administration, 
deemed  it  their  duty  to  join,  and  did  actually  join,  in  aid 
of  war  measures.  To  the  third  class,  the  pamphlet  al- 
leged, Mr.  King  belonged,  and  in  proof  of  it,  his  conduct 
in  the  senate  was  referred  to,  his  call  upon  Gov.  Tomp- 
kins, in  the  year  1814,  and  his  declarations  on  that  occa- 
sion, which  I  have  before  stated.  The  pam.phleteers  fur- 
ther urged  Mr.  King's  revolutionary  services,  and  they 
add,  as  another  reason  why  he  deserved  their  support, 
that  he  and  all  his  friends,  were  opposed  to  the  re-elec- 


516  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1820. 

tion  of  Mr.  Clinton.  "  There  is  no  doubt  of  it ^"^  say  they; 
and  to  fortify  this  assertion  they  refer  to  the  vote  of  John 
A.  King,  against  Gen.  German  for  speaker,  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  last  session. 

Why  should  the  same  politicians  who,  in  January,  1819, 
denounced  the  support  of  Rufus  King,  as  United  States 
senator,  as  the  most  heinous  of  political  sins,  without  any 
change  in  the  condition  of  the  country,  and  upon  traits  of 
character  developed,  and  acts  dorje  by  Mr.  King  in  1814 
and  1815,  which  were  as  well  known  to  them  at  that  time 
as  at  any  time  subsequent — why,  I  say,  should  the  same 
politicians,  in  December,  1819,  (for  the  pamphlet  was 
published  the  19th  of  that  month,)  declare  that  the  same 
Rufus  King  ought  to  be  supported  for  the  office,  and  vir- 
tually threaten  every  man  who  refused  to  do  so  with  ex- 
communication from  their  political  church  %  The  pam- 
phleteers attempt  to  assign  some  reasons  for  this,  but  they 
are,  as  obviously  they  must  have  been,  worthless  and  pu- 
erile. The  object  undoubtedly  was,  to  draw  in  a  portion 
of  the  federalists  to  the  support  of  Mr.  Tompkins,  at  the 
next  election;  an  object  which  they  accomplished,  though 
not  to  the  extent  they  anticipated.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  Clintonians  dared  not  oppose  the  election  of  Mr.  King, 
because  they  feared,  if  they  did  so,  they  should  lose  the 
support  of  Mr.  Clinton  by  the  federalists.  At  the  same 
time,  the  federalists  in  the  legislature,  led  by  Mr.  Oakley, 
had  not  self  respect  enough  to  spurn  the  support  of  a 
candidate  thus  imposed  on  them  by  men  who  were  de- 
nouncing their  party  as  so  contaminated  that  Mr.  Clinton 
deserved  political  death  for  holding  any  intercourse  with 
them.  Without  intending,  or  feeling,  personally,  the 
least  disrespect  to  Mr.  King,  who,  I  believe,  was  a  good 
as  well  as  a  great  man,  I  am  compelled  to  say,  that  the 
motives  which  induced  the  Bucktails  to  support  him,  ap- 
pear to  me  to  have  been  entirely  unjustifiable  ;  that  the 


1820.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  617 

motives  which  governed  the  federal  and  republican  Clin- 
tonians  were  equally  inexcusiablej  and  that,  in  relation  to 
Mr.  K.'s  Clintonian  republican  and  federal  supporters,they 
are  also  justly  chargeable  with  a  truckling  and  mean  poli- 
cy. I  was  myself  one  who  was  guilty  of  this  meanness, 
and  I  therefore  speak  the  more  freely  of  the  transaction. 
I  was  willing,  and  I  expressed  myself  so,  in  1819,  not- 
withstanding the  denunciations  of  the  Bucktails,  to  Lave 
voted  for  Mr.  King,  but  I  could  not  do  so  without  desert- 
ing my  party;  and  never  did  I  give  a  vote  with  so  much 
reluctance,  and  of  which  I  felt  myself  so  much  ashamed, 
(solely  in  consequence  of  the  manner  in  which  that  vote 
was  extorted  from  me,)  as  the  vote  I  gave  for  Mr.  King, 
in  1820.  I  ought  to  have  had  independence  and  honesty 
enough  to  have  voted  according  to  the  dictates  of  my  own 
conscience,  in  both  cases. 

Mr.  King  was  unanimously  re-elected. 

In  December,  1819,  the  territory  of  Missouri  applied 
to  congress  for  admission  into  the  Union  as  a  state;  ex- 
hibiting at  the  same  time  a  copy  of  her  constitution,  by 
which  negro  slavery  was  expressly  tolerated.  An  objec- 
tion was  raised  against  this  clause  in  their  constitution,  by 
Gen.  James  Talmadge  from  this  state,  and  a  long  and  an- 
gry debate  ensued,  in  congress,  upon  that  question.  Much 
excitement  was  produced  in  this  state  by  the  discussion, 
and  the  feeling  was  apparently  universal  here,  in  favor  of 
the  ground  assumed  by  Gen.  Talmadge.  The  subject 
was  taken  into  consideration  in  the  assembly,  and  a  reso- 
lution offered  by  Mr.  McNeil,  of  Oneida  county,  as  chair- 
man of  a  committee  to  whom  the  matter  was  referred,  in- 
structing the  senators,  and  requesting  the  members  of  the 
house  of  representatives,  in  congress,  from  the  state  of 
New-York,  to  support  the  ground  taken  by  Gen.  Tal- 
madge. This  resolution  passed  both  houses  of  our  legis- 
lature unanimously. 


518  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1820. 

On  the  4th  of  February,  the  assembly  proceeded  to  the 
choice  of  a  council  of  appointment,  and  John  D.  Ditmis 
of  the  southern,  John  Lounsbury  of  the  middle,  Levi  Ad- 
ams of  the  eastern,  and  Ephraim  Hart  of  the  western  dis- 
tricts, were  chosen  by  the  joint  votes  of  the  federal  and 
Clintonian  members.  All,  except  Mr.  Ditmis,  were  Clin- 
tonians. 

A  few  sheriffs  and  some  other  officers  were  removed  by 
this  council  from  political  considerations,  but,  in  general, 
no  very  important  changes  were  made  by  it,  principally,  I 
presume,  for  the  reason  that  by  this  time  the  offices  were 
nearly  all  filled  by  Clintonians.  The  appointments  in  the 
western  district  were  mainly  regulated  by  Mr.  Hart,  and 
it  is  due  to  him  to  say,  that  Mr.  Evans,  a  Bucktail  sena- 
tor, in  accounting  to  me  for  the  reason  why  Mr.  Clinton 
received  so  large  a  majority  in  the  western  district,  in 
April,  1820,  ascribed  it  to  the  very  judicious  manner  in 
which  the  appointments  had  been  made,  under  the  advise- 
ment of  Mr.  Hart. 

On  the  26th  of  January,  a  charge  was  made  in  the 
New-York  American  to  the  following  purport:  that  in  the 
year  1811,  or  beginning  of  1812,  the  applicants  for  char- 
tering the  Bank  of  America  had  agreed  with  Wm.  W.  Van 
Ness,  Elisha  Williams,  and  Jacob  R.  Van  Rensselaer,  in  or- 
der to  procure  their  aid  in  the  application,  that  the  bank, 
when  chartered,  should  loan  to  the  Columbia  County  Bank 
one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars,  for  the  term  of 
fifteen  years,  at  an  interest  of  six  per  cent;  that  the  Bank 
of  Columbia  should  pay  the  interest  annually  to  Mr. 
Williams  and  his  associates,  who  were  to  retain  in  their 
hands  for  their  own  private  use,  three  per  cent,  that  is, 
one-half  the  whole  annual  interest.  That  after  the  char- 
ter was  granted  and  the  bank  was  organized,  the  directors 
refused  to  sanction  this  agreement,  but  proposed  to  pay 
Messrs.  Williams,  Van  Ness  and  Van   Rensselaer  twenty 


1820.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  5 19 

thousand  dollars,  in  satisfaction  of  the  agTeement,  which 
proposition  was  accepted  by  Mr.  Will  lams,  in  behalf  of 
himself  and  his  associates,  and  the  money  was  accordingly 
paid  to  Mr.  Williams,  but  that  after  receiving  the  money, 
Mr.  W.  refused  to  divide  any  portion  of  it  with  his  part- 
ners, unless  they  would  agree  that  a  fourth  person 
should  be  allowed  to  receive  an  equal  share  of  it. 

On  the  28th  of  January,  Gen.  Root  produced  in  the 
assembly  the  paper  containing  this  article,  and  offered  the 
following  resolution: 

"  Resolved)  That  a  committee  be  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  conduct  of  William  W.  Van  Ness,  Esq.  one  of 
the  justices  of  the  supreme  court  of  this  state,  and  report 
their  opinion  whether  the  said  William  W.  Van  Ness  hath 
so  acted  in  his  official  capacity  as  to  require  the  interposi- 
tion of  the  constitutional  power  of  this  house,  and  that 
said  committee  have  power  to  send  for  persons  and 
papers." 

This  resolution,  together  with  a  preamble,  stating  the 
grounds  upon  which  the  inquiry  was  directed,  proposed 
by  Col.  McKown,  a  member  from  Albany,  was  adopted, 
and  a  committee  appointed:  the  following  are  the  names 
of  the  gentlemen  who  composed  the  committee: — Messrs. 
McKown,  Root,  Fox,  Irving,  John  Miller,  Walbridge, 
Jedediah  Miller,  Nelson  and  Vail. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  go  into  a  detail  of  the  proceedings  ' 
which  followed  the  adoption  of  this  resolution.  It  will 
be  sufficient  to  state  that  proofs  were  taken  before  the 
committee,  that  some  circumstances  were  disclosed  which 
rendered  the  conduct  of  some  of  the  gentlemen  accused 
suspicious,  but  that  the  majority  of  the  house  ultimately 
decided  that  the  proofs  did  not  warrant  an  impeachment  of 
Judge  Van  Ness.  The  members  of  the  house  generally 
took  sides  for  or  against  an  impeachment,  according  to 
the  party  to  which  they  belonged  j  that  is  the   federalists 


520  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1820. 

and  Clintonians  resisted  and  the  bucktails  generally  favored 
an  impeachment. 

Judge  Van  Ness  who  was  a  man  of  great  sensibility, 
was  deeply  affected  by  these  procedings,  and  it  is  said, 
that  his  feelings,  eventually  induced  an  impaired  state  of 
health  from  which  he  never  recovered.* 

*  Mr.  Elisha  Williams  was  examined  on  oath  by  the  committee,  and  his  depo 
sition  as  taken  by  them  is  annexed  to  their  report. 

He  stated  that  before  the  bank  was  chartered  he  made  an  agreement  with  persons 
who  assumed  to  be  its  agents,  that  the  Bank  of  Columbia  should  keep  its  accounts 
with  the  Bank  of  America;  that  the  latter  bank  should  allow  the  former  to  over- 
draw its  account  to  the  sum  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars,  on  paying 
an  interest  of  three  per  cent  only;  that  this  arrangement  should  continue  fifteen 
years,  and  that  this  contract  was  made  with  Mr.  Williams  individually  and  for 
his  individual  benefit.  He  acted  solely  for  himself,  and  had  a  right  to  make  such 
terms  with  the  Bank  of  Columbia  as  he  and  the  directors  might  mutually  agree 
upon.  Judge  Van  Ness  knew  nothing  of  this  contract  until  after  the  bank  vat 
chartered  in  1813. 

Before  the  Bank  of  America  went  into  operation,  Mr.  Wolcott,  the  president 
proposed  to  Mr.  Williams  a  material  change  of  the  terms  of  the  contract,  alleg- 
ing that  from  the  probable  future  condition  of  the  monetary  affairs  of  the  country, 
the  bank  would  be  unable  to  loan  so  large  a  sum  of  money  for  so  great  a  length 
of  time,  at  so  low  an  interest.  He,  therefore,  proposed  to  stipulate  that  the 
Bank  of  Columbia  might  overdraw  its  account  in  the  Bank  of  America,  to  the 
amount  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars  for  fifteen  years,  paying  an  in- 
terest at  the  rate  of  six  per  cent,  and  that  Mr.  Williams  and  two  other  responsible 
persons  for  him  should  become  sureties  for  the  faithful  performance  of  the  en- 
gagements of  the  Bank  of  Columbia.  Mr.  Wolcott  further  proposed  in  considera 
tion,  that  the  first  contract  should  be  abandoned,  and  the  proposed  one  adopted  in 
lieu  of  it  to  pay  Mr.  Williams  twenty  thousand  dollars.  Mr.  Wolcott  further  of- 
fered to  accept  as  sureties  for  Mr.  Williams,  Jacob  R.  Van  Rensselaer  and  Judge 
Van  Ness.  These  propositions  were  accepted  by  Mr.  Williams,  and  he  applied  to 
Mr.  Van  Rensselaer  to  become  one  of  his  sureties,  to  which  he  consented  on  con- 
dition that  Williams  would  pay  him  five  thousand  dollars  out  of  the  twenty  thou- 
sand he  was  to  receive  from  the  Bank  of  America,  to  which  Williams  agreed. 
Mr.  W.  then  applied  to  Judge  Van  Ness,  and  requested  him  also  to  become  his 
surety,  to  which  he  readily  consented  without  fee  or  reward  ;  but  Williams  in 
sisted  on  paying,  and  did  pay  him  the  same  sum  he  paid  Van  Kensselaer,  namely, 
five  thousand  dollars.     [See  Assembly  Journal  of  1820,  p.  833.] 

Assuming  this  statement  to  be  true,  and  it  would  be  extremely  uncharitable  to 
doubt  the  oath  of  such  a  man  as  Elisha  Williams,  I  cannot  perceive  anything  in 
the  transaction  which  in  the  slightest  degree  ought  to  tarnish  the  character  of 
Judge  Van  Ness.  The  deposition  of  Mr.  Williams  was  strengthened  and  support- 
ed by  the  testimony  of  J.  R.  Van  Rensselaer  and  Charles  Newbold,  one  of  the 
agents  and  directors  of  the  Bank  of  America. 

Judge  Van  Ness,  it  appeared,  had  exerted  his  influence  in  favor  of  granting  the 
charter  for  the  bank,  and  the  fact  that  he  had  received  five  thousand  dollars,  which 
came  originally  from  that  institution,  was  urged  as  an  evidence  that  his  motives 
were  impure.  But  Mr  Williams  testified  that  the  federalist-;,  as  a  party,  were  ani- 


1820.]  OF    NEW-YOKK.  521 

The  governor  in  his  speech  at  the  opening  of  the 
session  recommended  the  call  of  a  convention  with  pow- 
ers (limited  in  the  act  by  which  the  call  should  be  made) 
to  abolish  the  council  of  appointment,  and  consider  on 
such  other  amendments  to  the  constitution  as  should  be 
designated  by  the  legislature.  Had  he  done  this  one  year 
before,  and  his  friends  supported  his  recommendation,  it 
would  probably  have  been  better  for  him  and  for  the  state 
also. 

A  bill  was  brought  in  and  discussed,  but  as  the  assem  y^ 
bly    greatly  differed,  not  only  about   the    details  but  the 
principles  which  ought  to  be  embraced  in  it,  it   failed  of 
becoming  a  law.     Most  of  the  Bucktails  were  for  calling 
a  convention  with  unlimited  powers. 

Early  in  the  session,  the  comptroller  communicated  to 
the  assembly  a  history  of  his  proceedings  under  the  act 
for  "  the  settlement  of  the  accounts  of  D.  D.  Tompkins;" 
stating  the  difference  in  opinion  between  him  and  the  vice- 
president  in  relation  to  the  construction  of  that  act,  and 
the  reasons  upon  which  his  opinion  was  founded.  This 
communication  was  referred  to  a  select  committee  of 
which  Jedediah  Miller  of  Schoharie  was  chairman. 

On  the  16th  of  March,  the  committee  made  a  very 
long  and  able  report,  in  which  they  examined  wuth 
great  minuteness,  the  several  matters  involved  in  the 
controversy,  and  finally  recommended  the  adoption  of 
the  following  resolution:  — 

"  Resolvedj  as  the  sense  of  this  house,  that  the  con- 
duct of  the  comptroller  in  regard  to  the  auditing  and 
settling  the  accounts  of  Daniel  D.  Tompkins,  Esq.  late 

ious  to  incorporate  this  company,  because  it  was  known  that  a  majority  of  the  stock 
would  be  taken  up  by  federalists,  and  that  thus  an  institution  might  be  created 
capable  of  counteracting  the  political  influence  of  the  Manhattan  Company.  AU 
who  knew  Judge  Van  Ness,  well  know  that  he  was  much  more  desirous  of  politi- 
cal ascendency,  than  peouni.iry  gains.  Is  it  not  then  easy  to  account  for  his  "xer- 
tions  in  favor  of  chartering  the  Bank  of  America,  without  imputing  to  him  con  apt 
motives  ? 


522  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1320. 

governor  of  this  state,  both  previous  to,  and  under  the 
act  of  the  13th  of  April,  1819,  has  been  that  of  a  firm, 
faithful  and  intelligent  public  officer,  and  meets  the  full 
and  entire  approbation  of  this  house." 

The  merits  of  this  report  were  discussed  with  great 
ability  for  many  days.  Those  who  most  distinguished 
themselves  in  support  of  the  views  presented  by  the 
committee,  were,  Messrs.  Oakley,  Spencer,  (the  speak- 
er,) E.  Williams,  McKown,  C.  H.  Ruggles,  now  a  dis- 
tinguished judge  of  the  third  circuit,  Ogden  of  Otsego, 
Jno.  Miller  of  Cortland,  Fox  of  Warren,  H,  Camp  of 
Tompkins,  and  Tibbits  of  Troy.  The  most  powerful 
and  efficient  men  in  the  opposition,  were  Messrs.  Root, 
Sharpe,  Roma.n,Ulshoeffer,  J.  T.  Irving  and  Seymour.  I 
have  said  that  this  assembly  contained  much  talent;  of  this 
assertion  the  debates  on  this  question,  and  on  the  proceed- 
ings against  Judge  Van  Ness,  furnished  a  conclusive  and 
splendid  demonstration.  I  was  a  member  of  the  house  of 
representatives  of  the  United  States,  and  of  course  heard 
the  discussions  of  that  body  for  two  successive  ses- 
sions, and  I  have  on  several  occasions  witnessed  the 
debates  in  the  house  of  commons  in  England,  and  al- 
though in  those  bodies  there  were  individuals  possessing 
higher  qualities  as  statesmen,  and  parliamentary  orators 
than  in  the  New-York  assembly,  yet  if  the  whole  num- 
ber of  public  speakers  in  those  bodies  were  compared, 
with  the  whole  corps  of  debaters  in  the  assembly  of  1820, 
I  do  not  think  the  latter  would  suffer  by  a  comparison 
with  the  former.  I  may  be  incompetent  to  judge — I  may 
be  partial  to  the  inhabitants  of  my  own  state,  and  of 
course  I  may  misjudge,  but  this  is  my  honest  opinion. 
For  skill  in  argument,  parliamentary  tact,  pungency  of 
wit,  and  clear,  sound,  logical  powers  of  mind,  few  men  of 
the  age  would,  I  imagine,  have  excelled  Messrs.  Oakley, 
E.  Williams,  E.  Root,  J.  C.  Spencer,  Ulshoeffer,  Romain, 


1B20.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  523 

and  McKown.  The  last  named  gentleman  was  a  young 
member,  and  distinguished  himself  most  in  the  discussions 
which  grew  out  of  the  resolution  of  inquiry  into  the  con- 
duct of  Judge  Van  Ness,  proposed  by  Gen.  Root.  It  is 
deeply  to  be  regretted,  that  he  did  not  longer  continue  a 
member  of  our  legislative  assemblies.  His  talents  which 
are  of  the  first  order,  seemed  to  me  to  be  particularly 
adapted  for  usefulness  in  those  bodies. 

On  the  12th  of  January,  Mr.  Van  Buren  offered  a  reso- 
lution in  the  senate,  calling  on  the  comptroller  to  report 
to  that  house  whether  the  accounts  between  the  state  and 
T>.  D.  Tompkins  had  been  settled  according  to  the  act  of 
the  last  session,  and  if  not,  then  to  transmit  to  the  senate 
a  copy  of  the  claim  which  had  been  exhibited  by  the 
late  governor  against  the  state,  and  generally  the  action 
of  the    comptroller  on  that  subject. 

In  answer  to  this  call,  Mr.  Mclntyre  presented  a  con- 
cise view  of  the  transactions  between  him  and  the  vice- 
president  on  that  subject;  and  that  answer  was  referred  to 
a  select  committee  of  which  Mr.  Van  Buren  was  chair- 
man. 

On  the  9th  of  March,  the  last  mentioned  committee 
made  an  able  and  eloquent  report  to  the  senate,  in  which 
they  reviewed  the  proceedings  under  the  act  of  the  last 
session,  and  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the  comptroller 
ought  to  have  allowed  Gov.  Tompkins  a  premium  of  twelve 
and  a  half  per  cent  on  one  million  fifty  thousand  dollars, 
which  would  produce  one  hundred  and  thirty-one  thousand 
two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars;  and  would  leave  a  balance 
due  him  according  to  the  estimate  of  the  committee,  of 
eleven  thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy  dollars  and 
fifty  cents;  and  they  reported  a  bill  for  the  payment  to 
the  late  governor  of  that  balance,  upon  his  releasing  all  his 
claims  against  the  state. 


524  POLITICAL     HISTORY  L^S^O. 

It  may  be  proper  to  state  that  it  was  admitted  by 
the  vice-president  and  his  friends,  that  the  services  for 
which  he  claimed  compensation  were  rendered  to  the  Uni- 
ted States,  and  that  the  losses  he  had  sustained  had  been 
incurred  in  their  service,  and  therefore,  that  the  United 
States  government  and  not  the  state  of  New- York,  ought 
to  remunerate  hirri  for  those  serivces  and  losses,  and  accord- 
ingly the  original  bill  directed  the  comptroller  to  debit  the 
United  States  witli  the  amount  of  money  allowed  by  him 
to  the  vice-president  for  sercives,  &.c. 

When  the  report  of  the  committee,  together  with  the  bill 
came  up  in  the  senate,  the  argument  which  one  would 
naturally  have  supposed  would  have  been  rather  a  dry  law 
argument  upon  the  construction  of  the  act  of  1819,  and 
the  intention  of  the  legislature  in  passing  it,  probably 
with  a  view  of  exciting  odium  against  the  comptroller, 
was  chiefly  directed  to  the  items  which  had  been  claimed 
by  the  vice-president,  and  rejected  by  the  comptroller. 
This  course  of  argument  however  was  excusable,  because 
in  discussing  the  same  question  in  the  assembly,  the  Clin- 
tonians  had  criticised  with  great  severity  many  of  the 
charges  made  by  the  vice-president,  probably  with  a  view 
of  exciting  public  odium  against  him. 

The  only  speech  made  in  support  of  the  report  and  bill, 
was  made  by  Mr.  Van  Buren.  It  occupied  a  part  of  two 
days,  and  was  one  of  the  most  ingenious,  able  and  elo- 
quent speeches  I  ever  heard.  It  has  been  the  custom  of 
the  opponents  of  this  gentleman,  both  in  the  state  and 
nation,  to  give  him  credit  for  great  tact  and  management  as 
a  mere  politician,  and  to  deny  that  he  possesses  those  high 
and  exalted  powers  of  mind  which  always  distinguish  the 
great  statesman  and  the  commanding  parliamentary  orator. 
But  any  fair  minded  man,  who  has  heard  Mr.  Van  Buren  on 
great  and  important  questions  in  our  legislative  assemblies, 
whether  state  or  national,  will  not  hesitate  to  award  him 


1820.]  OF  NEw-roRK.  525 

the  meed  of  high  merit.  It  is  on  these  occasions  and 
more  especially  in  his  efforts  as  a  lawyer  in  our  highest 
courts  of  judicature,  that  Mr.  Van  Buren  has  afforded 
decisive  demonstration  of  the  most  commanding  and 
splendid  intellectual  powers.  In  the  senate,  the  opposition 
to  the  report  and  bill  was  feeble.  Mr.  Granger  after- 
wards published  a  written  argument,  which  in  conse- 
quence of  ill-health,  was  not  delivered  in  the  senate,  pur- 
porting to  be  an  answer  to  Mr.  Van  Buren,  but  it  had  lit- 
tle effect  on  the  public  mind. 

The  report  was  concurred  in,  and  the  bill  was  passed 
by  a  majority  of  nearly  two  to  one. 

When  this  bill  from  the  senate  came  into  the  assembly, 
it  was  referred  to  a  committee  of  which  Mr.  Oakley  was 
chairman.  On  the  6th  of  April,  he  made  a  report  against 
it.  That  report  assumed  that  the  proceedings  of  the 
comptroller,  had  been,  in  the  judgment  of  the  committee, 
correct;  that  no  further  legislation  than  that  contained  in 
the  act  of  1819,  ought  to  be  had  on  the  subject;  that  the 
vice-president  must  seek  his  relief  under  that  law,  in  the 
same  way,  and  on  the  same  footing  of  all  other  citizens; 
and  that  he  ought  to  be  satisfied  with  the  construction 
which  should  be  given  to  the  statute  by  the  judicial  tribu- 
nals of  the  country,  and  with  a  view  to  obtain  that  con- 
struction, the  committee  recommended  an  amendment  to 
the  senate's  bill  by  striking  out  the  whole  of  it  except 
the  enacting  clause,  and  inserting  in  lieu  thereof  a  provi- 
sion requiring  the  comptroller  in  case  the  vice-president 
should  not  pay  the  balance  declared  at  the  accounting 
office  to  be  due  from  him,  by  the  first  day  of  August,  then 
next,  to  commence  a  suit  against  him  for  the  recovery  of 
the  same;  in  which  suit  the  vice-president  should  be  permit- 
ted to  offesett  his  claim  for  premiums  under  the  act  of  1819. 

This  report  was  confirmed  by  the  majority  in  the  assem- 


526  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1820. 

biy,  and  the  bill  passed    as   amended    by  the  select  com 
mittee;  and  here  all  action  in  the  two  houses  ended. 

In  conclusion,  I  have  to  remark,  that  notwithstanding 
this  controversy  continued  so  long  in  the  legislature,  and 
among  the  people,  and  excited  so  much  asperity  and  bit- 
terness, the  real  object  of  the  two  parties,  so  far  as  the 
same  was  to  be  effected  by  legislation,  did  not  materially 
differ.  Both  parties  admitted  that  the  services  of  Gov. 
Tompkins  during  the  war,  had  been  great  and  arduous;  both 
admitted  that  he  had  not  intentionally  wasted  or  appro- 
priated to  his  own  use  the  public  moneys;  both  admitted 
the  comptroller  to  be  a  correct,  able  and  faithful  ac- 
counting officer;  both  were  willing  and  desirous  that  the 
accounts  of  the  vice-president  with  the  state  should  be 
balanced  without  the  payment  by  him  of  a  single  cent, 
and  neither  would  consent  that  after  balancins:  his  ac 
counts  any  considerable  sum  should  be  paid  to  him.  The 
difference  so  far  as  principle  was  concerned,  consisted  in 
the  manner  of  doing  that  which  all  believed  ought  to  be 
done.  The  one  party  desired  to  pay  him^  as  a  debt,  say 
one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand  dollars;  the  other  wish- 
ed to  allow  him  that  sum  in  consideration  of  his  losses, 
and  as  a  gratuitous  reward  for  his  services.  Had  a  bill 
been  brought  in,  reciting  those  services  and  losses,  and 
the  confused  state  of  the  vice-president's  vouchers,  and 
accounts,  and  directing  the  comptroller  in  consideration 
thereof,  to  balance  his  accounts,  it  must  in  any  stage  of 
this  controversy  have  passed  both  houses  unanimously;  and 
such  should  have  been  the  bill  passed  in  1819.  The  notion 
of  charging  the  amount  allowed  to  the  vice-president,  to 
the  United  States,  was  a  humbug,  and  known  to  be  such. 
Hence  it  is  most  evident  that  the  reason  the  controversy 
assumed  the  shape  it  ultimately  did,  and  of  the  adverse 
action  of  the  two  houses  was,  that  both    parties  thought 


1820.]  OF   NEW- YORK.  527 

they  could  make  political  capital  out  of  it,  and  each  par- 
ty thought  it  could  make  more  than  the  other. 

On  the  I8th  of  January,  a  caucus  of  republican  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature  opposed  to  the  re-election  of  Gov. 
Clinton,  was  held  at  the  capitol.  Sixty-four  members 
were  in  attendance,  of  whom,  fifty-two  on  balloting  voted 
for  Tompkins  as  the  candidate  for  governor,  and  he  was 
therefore  declared  duly  nominated. 

Gen.  Benjamin  Mooers  of  Plattsburgh,  of  the  senate, 
was  nominated  the  candidate  for  lieutenant  governor. 

Gen.  Mooers  had  been  nominated  and  elected  at  the 
very  last  election  a  senator  from  the  eastern  district,  by 
the  Clintonians  as  a  Clintonian.  Here  is  another  instance 
of  a  senator  elected,  professing  to  belong  to  one  party 
and  immediately  or  shortly  after,  declaring  himself  to  be 
of  the  other.  This  is  a  sort  of  political  swindling, — a 
cheating  by  false  pretences.  Probably  Gen.  Mooers  did 
'not  take  this  view  of  the  question,  for  he  was  apparently 
an  amiable  and  good  man,  and  I  believe,  as  a  neighbor 
and  citizen,  was  universally  esteemed. 

The  republican  friends  of  Gov.  Clinton  in  the  legisla- 
ture were  at  this  session  in  the  minority.  It  was  not, 
therefore,  thought  judicious  to  make  a  legislative  nomina- 
tion. In  order  to  prevent  a  public  exhibition  of  the  mea- 
greness  of  our  number,  making  a  merit  of  necessity,  we  af- 
fected to  disapprove  of  selections  of  gubernatorial  candi- 
dates by  legislative  caucuses.  Mr.  Clinton  and  John  Tay- 
ler  were  nominated  for  re-election  at  a  meeting  of  the 
citizens  of  Albany,  of  which  Mr.  William  James  was 
chairman. 

The  state  candidates  of  both  parties  were  now  in  the 
field,  and  the  campaign  was  fairly  and  vigorously  opened. 

On  the  11th  of  April,  a  most  singular  document,  hav- 
ing reference  to  the  coming  election,  was  issued  from  the 
press  at  Albany,  and  circulated  through  the  state. 


528  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1820. 

Ever  since,  and  perhaps  before  the  contest  for  speaker 
in  1819,  and  for  an  United  States  senator  during  the 
same  session,  a  party  among  the  federalists,  of  whom 
William  A.  Duer  of  Albany,  and  Charles  King  of  New- 
York,  were  the  most  active,  seemed  to  have  been  formed 
with  the  avowed  object  at  all  events  of  putting  down  De 
Witt  Clinton. 

The  sons  of  the  late  Gen.  Hamilton  and  of  Mr.  Rufus 
King,  early  and  unanimously  formed  a  part  of  this  asso- 
ciation. From  an  article  published  by  Mr.  William  Cole- 
man in  the  Evening  Post,  a  few  days  after  the  election  in 
1820,  it  appears  that  he  too  was  inclined  to  join  in  the 
combination.  From  a  community  of  feeling, prejudices, 
principles,  interests  and  views,  several  distinguished  federal 
gentlemen  residing  in  various  counties  in  the  state,  also 
united  eventually  with  them  in  political  action.  One  of 
the  strongest  objections  they  seemed  to  have  entertained 
against  Mr.  Clinton,  was  that  his  party  partook  of  the' 
character  of  a  personal  party;  that  those  whom  he  was 
most  inclined  to  favor,  were  continually  lauding  him,  and 
that  there  was  among  his  confidential  friends  and  favor- 
ites a  total  want  of  independence,  of  character  and  a  sup- 
pleness of  disposition,  (which  by  the  by  may  have  been 
partially  true  when  applied  to  many  of  Mr.  C.'s  old 
friends  in  New- York,)  disgusting  to  the  feelings  of  all 
truly  high  minded  and  honorable  men  who  entertained  a 
decent  self  respect.  From  frequently  urging  this  view 
of  the  character  of  Gov.  Clinton  and  his  confidential 
friends,  this  class  of  federalists  acquired  the  name  of 
"  HIGH  minded"  federalists. 

On  the  14th  of  April,  these  gentlemen,  to  the  number 
of  fifty,  issued  an  address  to  the  people  containing  an  ex- 
pose of  their  political  views,  and  avowing  their  determi- 
nation to  support  the  election  of  Mr.  Tompkins,  and  the 
reason  upon  which  that  determination  rested.     This  is  the 


1820.] 


OF     NEW-YORK. 


529    if 


document  which  I  have  characterised  as  singular;  and  I 
do  so,  not  on  account  of  the  determination  made  by  its 
signers,  but  because  of  the  reasons  given  by  them  for  such 
determination;  and  here  let  me  remark,  that  so  formida- 
ble an  array  of  talent,  wealth,  influence  in  society,  and 
indeed  personal  worth,  embracing  so  many  men  and  so 
scattered  through  the  state,  I  do  not  believe,  can  be  found 
.n  the  annals  of  our  political  parties,  who  combined 
for  the  accomplishment  of  a  single  political  object,  but 
who  carried  so  few  of  the  rank  and  file  men  with  them, 
as  did  these  fifty  high  minded  federalists. 

To  show  that  I  do  not  overrate  the  talents,  standing  and 
weight  of  character  of  these  gentlemen,  I  give  the  names 
of  those  who  signed  the  address  which  fell  under  my 
observation  : 


Peter  Jay  Monroe, 
J.  O.  Hoffman, 
Jonathan  Hasbrouck, 
Geo.  D.  Wickham, 
Morris  S.  Miller, 
Melancthon  Wheeler, 
Levi  Callendar, 
Joshua  Whitney, 
John  Suydam, 
R.  W.  Stoddard, 
David  Hudson, 
H.  Montgomery, 
H.  B.  Bender, 
Geo.  W.  Tibbits, 
Thomas  Mumford, 
John  A.  King, 
Elisha  B.  Strong, 
Geo.  F.  Tallraan, 
Joshua  A.  De  Witt, 
Charles  A.  Foot, 


34 


James  Lynch, 
Glen  Cuyler, 
John  L.  Wendell, 
Charles  King, 
A.  B.  Hasbrouck, 
T.  S.  Morgan, 
JeS"rey  Wisner, 
James  A.  Hamilton, 
Ebenezer  Griffin, 
John  C.  Morris, 
Livingston  Billings, 
Tracy  Robinson, 
Johnson  Verplanck, 
Henry  Brown, 
Thomas  J.  Delancy, 
Thos.  G.  Waterman^ 
John  C.  Hamilton, 
John  Duer, 
Jas.  Clapp, 
Wm.  P.  Sherman, 


530  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1820. 

Isaac  Dubois,  Elisha  Ely 

Zeb.  R.  Shepherd,  H.  Yanderlyn, 

Alanson  Austin,  W.  W.  Mumford, 

Garrit  Post,  Wm.  A.  Duer. 

In  their  address,  they  commence  by  affirming  that  the 
federal  party — a  party  of  which  they  claim  to  have  been 
members,  and  of  whose  principles  they  profess  their  entire 
approbation,  no  longer  exists.  They  say,  as  a  party  it  is 
dissolved  and  annihilated,  and  that  even  the  bonds  "  of 
mutual  confidence  and  private  regard  dive  severed,  perhaps 
forever." 

They  approve  of  the  doings  and  administration  of  the 
general  government,  and  they  affirm  that  the  federalists 
have  now  "  no  ground  of  principle,"  on  which  to  stand, 
and  therefore  declare  their  intention  of  uniting  with  the 
great  republican  party  of  the  state  and  union.  They  do 
not  object  to  the  capacity  of  Mr.  Clinton,  to  his  morals 
nor  to  the  measures  he  had  recommended.  The  sole 
ground  of  objection  against  him  is,  that  they  allege  he 
is  attempting  to  form  "  a  personal  party." 

The  palpable  absurdity  with  which  this  address  strikes 
my  mind  is  this,  that  while  every  school  boy  in  the  state 
knew  that  Mr.  Van  Buren  and  his  friends  entirely  approved 
of  the  measures  recommended  by  Gov.  Clinton,  admitted 
his  competence  as  to  talents,  and  his  virtues  as  a  private 
citizen,  and  that  they  opposed  him  solely  and  exclusively 
on  the  ground  that  the  federal  party  did  exist  in  the  state, 
and  that  Mr.  Clinton  was  secretly  inclined  to  favor  it; 
yet  the  high  minded  gentlemen  opposed  Mr.  Clinton 
because,  as  they  alleged,  the  federal  party  did  not  existj 
and  thereupon  joined  the  party  who  held  the  contrary 
position. 

The  case  presents  this  most  extraordinary  spectacle. 
Two  parties  unite  to  oppose  the  election  of  a  governor, 
neither  of  which  charge  upon  him  a  want  of  capacity,  or 


1820.]  or  NEW-YORK.  531 

integrity,  or  utter  a  solitary  complaint  against  his  mea- 
sures. The  one  party  declare  that  the  federal  party  does 
not  exist;  and  yet  it  joins  the  other,  "  the  great  republi- 
can party,"  whose  only  bond  of  union  is  a  belief  that  the 
federal  party  does  exist,  which  proposition  the  high 
minded  men  had  publicly  avowed  was  untrue.  Such  are 
some  of  the  inconsistencies  of  politicians! 

The  election  was  very  close.  The  anti-Clintonian 
party,  which  now  fairly  deserves  to  be  denominated  the 
republican  party,  succeeded  in  electing  a  majority  of  the 
members  of  the  assembly,  and  in  two  of  the  senatorial 
districts,  notwithstanding  which,  Mr.  Clinton  was  re- 
elected by  a  majority  of  one  thousand  four  hundred  and 
fifty-seven  votes. 

The  senators  this  year  elected  were  Walter  Bowne  and 
John  Lefferts,  from  the  southern;  Wm.  C.  Bouck,  Tilly 
Lynde,  and  John  Miller,  from  the  middle;  Ephraim  Hart, 
Oliver  Forward  and  Elijah  Mills,  from  the  western  dis 
tricts. 


532  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1820. 


CHAPTER   XXVI. 

FROM  MAY  1,  18iJ0,  TO  MAY  1,  1821, 

The  result  of  the  election,  so  far  as  respects  political 
power,  was  a  complete  triumph  to  the  opponents  of  the 
governor.  In  the  senate  they  had  for  some  time  had  a 
strong  majority,  and  the  new  senators  elected  added  to 
that  majority.  In  the  assembly  the  majority  against  the 
governor  was  eighteen.  How  did  it  happen  that  Mr. 
Clinton,  when  his  friends  were  slain  around  him,  after  a 
competition  with  a  man  who,  perhaps,  was  personally 
more  popular  than  any  man  the  state  ever  produced, 
should  have  walked  off  the  field  in  triumph  ? 

Among  the  causes  to  which  this  result  is  to  be  ascribed, 
the  following  appear  to  me  most  prominent: 

The  people  are  always  sensitive,  and  justly  so,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  management  and  expenditure  of  their  money. 
If  the  vice-president  was  popular  as  a  governor,  Mr.  Mc- 
Intyre  -was  equally  so  as  a  citizen,  and  as  a  faithful  guar- 
dian of  the  treasury;  and  no  doubt  many  of  the  personal 
and  political  friends  of  the  late  governor  suspected  that 
there  was  something  wrong  in  his  accounts,  and  in  his 
management  of  the  public  funds,  and  withheld  from  him 
their  votes  on  that  account;  and  I  think  the  inference 
may  be  fairly  sustained,  that  he  lost  more  from  the  suspi- 
cion, than  he  gained  from  the  sympathy  of  his  republican 
friends. 

Notwithstanding  the  division  produced  by  the  corps  of 
high  minded  federalists,  ihe  great  body  of  the  federalists 
gave  Mr.  Clinton  a  more  unanimous  support  than  they 
had  done  either  Mr.  Burr  or  Gov.  Lewis.  As  a  party, 
the  name  of  Tompkins,  was  peculiarly  odious  to  them. 


1820.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  533 

Their  repeated,  though  unsuccessful  contests  with  him, 
had  increased,  rather  than  diminished  their  hostility.  Mr. 
Clinton,  had  never  deceived  them.  From  the  year 
1813,  when  he  and  many  of  his  most  devoted  friends  sup- 
ported Van  Rensselaer  against  Tompkins,  he  had  never 
made  professions  to  them  which  he  had  not  endeavored  to 
fulfil.  They  admired  his  indomitable  firmness  and  moral 
courage. 

Intelligent  men  of  all  parties  entertained  a  high  regard 
for  his  talents.  On  all  occasions  Clinton  manifested  great 
respect  for  literary  merit,  and  the  institutions  of  science. 
This  brought  into  his  support  the  friends  and  patrons  of 
those  institutions,  and,  generally,  the  scientific  men  of  the 
state. 

But  the  most  effectual  cause  of  his  triumph  was  the 
able,  ardent,  and  uniform  support  he  had  given  to  the  ca- 
nal policy.  He  had,  from  the  origin  of  that  policy,  com- 
mitted himself  in  its  favor,  and  had  boldly  staked  his  po- 
litical fortunes  on  its  issue.  He  was  its  uncompromising 
friend,  while  we  have  seen  that  Gov.  Tompkins  had  stu- 
diously avoided  any  direct  commitment  in  favor  of  the 
measure,  and  many  of  his  most  ardent  supporters,  particu- 
larly in  the  southern  district  of  the  state,  were  yet  open 
and  virulent  opponents  of  the  whole  scheme  of  internal 
improvements.  The  shrewd,  clear  sighted  yankee  farmers 
of  the  west  saw  and  appreciated  all  this.  Hence  the 
strong  majorities  for  Clinton  in  the  great  republican  coun- 
ties of  Ontario  and  Geneseej  and  hence  the  majorities  for 
him  m  the  eastern  and  western  districts,  those  districts 
being  most  directly  interested  in  the  accomplishment  of 
the  great  work.  The  returns  of  the  election  showed  a 
majority  for  De  Witt  Clinton,  in  the  eastern  district,  of 
two  thousand  three  hundred  and  fifty-two,  and,  in  the 
western,  three  thousand  four  hundred  and  fifty-two,  while 
the  middle  district  gave  the  vice-president  a  majority  of 


534  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1820. 

one  thousand  one  hundred  and  sixteen,  and  the  southern 
three  thousand  two  hundred  and  thirty-one. 

The  result  of  the  election  however,  had,  in  every  part  of 
xhe  state  except  the  western  district,  and  a  small  portion 
of  the  eastern,  drawn  together  and  formed  into  one  body 
nearly  all  the  old  republican  party,  in  opposition  to  the 
executive  authority  of  the  state. 

This  state  of  things  was  extremely  awkward  and  embar- 
rassing to  the  few  republicans  who  still  continued  to  yield 
to  the  governor  their  support.  We  felt  that  we  were  a 
mere  handful  of  men  dependent  on  the  federalists  for  our 
political  existence.  We  knew  that  that  party,  whom  we 
had  formerly  so  zealously,  and  some  of  us  efficiently  op- 
posed, were  as  well  aware  of  the  true  state  of  things  as 
we  could  be.  Perhaps  it  was  jealousy — perhaps  it  was 
unfounded  suspicion — but  I  confess  I  thought  the  federal- 
ists regarded  us  as  an  incumbrance  upon  them;  or  rather, 
somewhat  as  the  rich  man  regards  his  poor  relatives,  who 
have  been  cast  upon  his  charity  and  whom  he  feels  bound 
in  honor  to  maintain,  although  the  expenditure  for  that 
maintenance  goes  to  diminish  an  estate  which  he  has  a 
right  exclusively  to  enjoy. 

But,  if  the  federalists  did  entertain  these  feelings,  had 
we  any  cause  of  complaining  of  them  on  that  account  ? 
From  the  nature  of  the  case  were  not  those  feelings  ex- 
tremely natural  ?  We  were  a  fraction  of  the  republican 
party,  which  party  held  the  control  of  the  state.  We 
detached  ourselves  from  the  majority  of  our  party  and  by 
the  aid  of  the  federalists,  since  the  commencement  of  the 
year  1819,  had  controlled  the  patronage  and  political 
power  of  the  state,  and  yet,  we  still  professed  to  be  op- 
posed to  the  federalists.  We  declared  that  our  opinions  of 
their  principles  and  measures  remained  unchanged,  and  we, 
who  were  a  small  minority,  when  compared  with  the 
federalists,  and  a  still  smaller  minority  of  the  republican 


1820.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  535 

party,  claimed  an  almost  exclusive  controlj  and  vastly 
more  than  our  share,  of  the  state  patronage.  Was  this 
reasonable  1  Could  such  a  state  of  things  last  1  To 
illustrate  its  absurdity  I  will  suppose  the  federal  and  re- 
publican parties,  in  1819,  to  have  consisted  of  twelve  men 
only;  seven  of  whom  were  republicans  and  five  federalists. 
I  will  suppose  that  A.  and  B.,two  of  the  republicans,  de- 
tach themselves  from  the  seven,  and  by  the  aid  of  the  five 
federalists  seize  upon  the  state  patronage  and  use  it  all,  or 
nearly  all,  for  their  own  benefit.  It  is  most  evident  that 
so  unfair  and  unequal  a  state  of  things  could  not  long  ex- 
ist. The  five  federalists,  knowing  that  A.  and  B.  held 
power  entirely  at  their  pleasure,  would  either  seize  it 
themselves,  or  a  portion  of  them  would  go  over  to  the  five 
republicans,  with  whom  they  could,  at  least,  have  an  equal 
share  in  the  division  of  the  spoils. 

It  is  most  obvious  that  one  or  two  axioms  may  be  de- 
duced from  this  view  of  the  matter.  First — that  there 
can,  (in  general,)  be  but  two  political  parties  in  a  free 
state.  Second — that  when  a  fractional  portion  of  the  party 
in  the  majority  differ  in  opinion  with  the  majority  of  their 
party,  and  if  that  difference  is  so  fundamentally  important 
as,  in  their  judgment,  would  render  the  success  of  the  ad- 
verse party  beneficial  to  the  country,  they  ought  to  with- 
draw from  their  old  associates  and  join  as  rank  and  file 
men  the  adverse  party;  but  in  no  case  ought  they  to  at- 
tempt to  form  a  third  party,  in  expectation  of  the  aid  of 
the  minority  party  of  the  two  great  parties.  It  is  an  ex- 
pectation which  can  never,  from  the  nature  and  constitu- 
tion of  man  and  of  human  society,  be  realized. 

True  it  is,  if  an  individual  believes  the  object  and  end 
of  both  the  great  political  parties  to  be  injurious  to  the 
country,  he  has  the  right,  and  it  may  be  his  duty  to  with- 
draw himself  entirely  from  the  political  field;  and  if  there 
be  a  sufficient  number  of  individuals  who  entertain  similar 


536  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1820. 

Views,  a  new  party  may  be  formed;  but  in  this  case  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  new,  or  third  party,  to  make  war  indis- 
criminately on  each  of  the  two  existing  parties.  But  such 
a  state  of  things  can  seldom  exist  long.  It  is  as  unnatu- 
ral as  a  battle  between  three  ships  at  sea,  each  fighting 
against  the  other  two. 

The  title  of  the  Albany  Register  was,  about  this  time, 
changed  to  that  of  the  New-York  Statesman,  and  it  was 
now  under  the  exclusive  management  of  Mr.  Carter. 

On  the  25th  of  August  Judge  Buel  transferred  all  his 
interest  in  the  Albany  Argus  to  Moses  I.  Cantine  and 
Isaac  Q.  Leake.  Mr.  Cantine,  it  will  be  recollected,  was 
a  brother-in-law  of  Mr.  Van  Buren. 

That  paper,  under  the  judicious  and  prudent  control  of 
Mr.  Buel,  had  acquired  a  very  great  and  commanding  in- 
fluence in  the  democratic  party.  A  more  discreet  newspa- 
per editor  than  Mr.  B.  could  not  be  selected  from  the  whole 
corps  editorial  in  the  state.  Although  not  brilliant,  he 
was  wise;  but  the  profits  accruing  from  the  state  printing 
were,  and  are,  very  considerable,  and  Mr.  Buel  had,  by 
industry  and  good  management,  acquired  a  handsome  for- 
tune during  the  six  years  he  had  been  state  printer;  it  was 
therefore,  thought  reasonable  that  he  should  give  place  to 
other  personSjwho  were  supposed  to  have  equal,  or  perhaps 
superior  claims  on  the  democratic  party.  The  contract 
was  probably,  in  reality,  made,  rather  with  the  leaders  of 
the  democratic  party  than  with  Messrs.  Cantine  and  Leake 
— the  last  named  gentleman  stipulating  to  pay  Mr.  Buel 
a  round  sum  of  money  for  his  printing  establishment  and 
the  favor  to  it,  and  the  party  leaders  agreeing  that  Cantine 
and  Leake,  who,  by  the  by,  were  both  entirely  ignorant 
of  the  printing  business,  one  of  them  having  been  bred  a 
lawyer  and  the  other  brought  up  in  a  bank,  should  be  ap- 
pointed state  printers.     This  bargain  was  ultimately  car- 


1S20.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  537 

ried  into  effect,  and  sanctioned  by  an  act  of  the  legisla- 
ture. 

On  the  same  25th  day  of  August  a  meeting  was  held  at 
Tammany  Hall,  of  which  Stephen  Allen  was  chairman, 
and  Adrian  Hagerman  secretary;  at  which  it  was  resolved 
that  a  convention,  with  unlimited  powers  to  amend  the 
constitution,  ought  to  be  called. 

Heretofore  the  republicans  opposed  to  Mr.  Clinton,  as 
well  as  those  who  supported  him,  had  differed  in  opinion 
in  relation  to  the  details  of  a  bill  for  the  call  of  a  conven- 
tion. The  re-eleetion  of  Mr.  Clinton  had  probably  pro- 
duced, in  the  ranks  of  the  democracy,  an  unanimity  of 
opinion  on  that  subject.  They  perceived  that  the  only 
sure  means  of  ridding  themselves  of  him,  was  by  a  change 
of  some  of  the  principles  of  the  government;  and  they 
availed  themselves,  with  great  skill  and  adroitness,  of  the 
propensity  of  the  people  for  an  alteration  of  the  constitu- 
tion, to  effect  that  object.  I  speak  now,  not  of  the  mass, 
but  of  some  of  the  considerations  which  probably  influ- 
enced mere  politicians. 

The  meeting  at  Tammany  was,  no  doubt,  the  result  o^ 
a  consultation  of  the  party  leaders  in  the  state;  for  the 
democratic  newspapers  generally,  throughout  the  country, 
now  advocated  a  convention  with  powers  unrestricted. 

On  account  of  the  approaching  presidential  election  a 
session  cf  the  legislature,  in  November,  was  required  for 
the  appointment  of  electors. 

Peter  Sharpe,  of  New-York,  was  elected  speaker  of  the  ^ 
assembly.  He  received  sixty-nine  votes  for  that  office, 
and  John  C.  Spencer  fifty-two.  Derick  L.  Vanderheyden 
was  chosen  clerk  by  the  following  vote; — D.  L.  Vander- 
heyden sixty-three,  and  Aaron  Clarke  sixty-two  votes. 
Mr.  Clark  was  an  excellent  clerk,  but  not  a  very  decided 
politician;  both  parties  claimed  him,  or  rather  he  occa- 
sionally claimed  both  parties.     A  majority  of  the  reformed 


538  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1820. 

democratic  party  was  now  found,  but  barely  strong 
enough  to  oust  him  by  one  vote.  In  a  pecuniary  point 
of  view,  and  perhaps  in  all  other  respects,  his  ejection 
from  the  clerkship  of  the  assembly  was  beneficial  to  him. 
He  removed  shortly  afterwards  to  New- York,  and  I 
scarcely  need  add,  he  has  since  been  twice  elected  mayor 
of  that  city. 

The  governor's  speech,  which  was  written  with  his  usual 
ability,  contained  many  highly  important  suggestions  and 
recommendations. 

He  advised  the  passage  of  a  law  for  the  choice  of  presi- 
dential electors  by  the  people,  by  general  ticket,  to  con- 
tinue in  force  until  the  United  States  constitution  should 
be  so  amended  as  to  require  the  electors  to  be  chosen  in 
separate  districts,  throughout  the  union. 

He  protested  against  the  interference  of  the  officers  of 
the  national  government  with  our  state  elections.  On  that 
subject,  he  said: — "  Our  government  is  complex  in  its  or- 
ganization, and  it  is  essentially  necessary  to  preserve  the 
state  governments  in  their  purity  and  energy.  A  free 
government  could  never  exist  in  a  country  so  extensive  as 
the  United  States,  without  a  judicious  combination  of  the 
federal  and  representative  principles.  The  apprehensions 
which  some  of  our  wisest  statesmen  entertained,  at  the 
formation  of  the  constitution,  that  the  state  governments 
would  constantly  encroach  on  the  powers  of  the  national 
government,  appear  not  to  have  been  realized.  The  prac- 
tical tendency  has  been  in  the  opposite  direction.  The 
power  of  the  general  administration  has  increased  with 
the  extension  of  its  patronage.  And  if  the  officers  under 
its  appointment  shall  see  fit,  as  an  organized  and  disci- 
plined corps,  to  interfere  in  the  state  elections,  I  trust  that 
there  will  be  found  a  becoming  disposition  in  the  people, 
to  resist  these  alarming  attempts  upon  the  purity  and  inde- 
pendence of  their  local  governments:  for,  whenever  the 


1820.]  OF    NEW-YOHK.  539 

pillars  which  support  the  edifice  of  the  general  govern- 
ment are  undermined  and  prostrated,  the  whole  fabric  of 
national  freedom  and  prosperity  will  be  crushed  in  ruin. 
I  have  considered  it  my  solemn  duty  to  protest  against 
these  unwarrantable  intrusions  of  extraneous  influence,  and 
I  hope  that  the  national  legislature  will  not  be  regardless 
of  its  duty  on  this  occasion." 

He  also  again  recommended  a  state  convention  to  amend 
the  constitution,  to  be  binding  on  the  following  conditions* 

First — That  the  question  whether  a  convention  should 
be  called,  should  be  submitted  to  the  people  and  decided 
by  them  by  a  majority  of  votes  at  the  polls  of  election; 
and  second — if  a  convention  should  be  in  this  way  called, 
that  their  doings  should  again  be  submitted  to  the  people 
for  their  confirmation  or  rejection. 

On  the  eighth  of  November,  the  second  day  after  the 
legislature  convened,  the  assembly  proceeded  to  choose  a 
council  of  appointment;  and  the  following  was  the  result 
of  the  vote: — southern  district,  Walter  Bowne,  seventy- 
one;  middle,  John  T.  Moore,  seventy-one;  eastern,  Roger 
Skinner,  seventy-one;  western,  David  E.  Evans,  seventy- 
one.  The  Clintonian  candidates  were  Townsend,  Ross, 
Frothingham  and  Barstow,  who  each  received  fifty-four 
votes. 

All  the  members  of  the  new  elected  council  were  politi- 
cally hostile  to  the  governor,  and  all,  except  Mr.  Evans, 
were  particularly  and  especially  so.  The  propriety  of  se- 
lecting Mr.  Skinner  for  a  councillor,  was  questioned  with 
great  plausibility.  He  had  been,  about  a  year  before,  ap- 
pointed United  States  judge  of  the  northern  district  of 
New- York,  an  office  which  had  become  vacant  by  the 
death  of  Judge  Talmadge.  In  more  early,  and  perhaps  it 
might  not  be  too  much  to  say,  purer  days  of  the  republic, 
that  same  senate  of  which  Judge  Skinner  was  a  member, 
had  resolved  that  the  holding  of  an  office  under  the  United 


540  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

States  was  incompatible  with  a  seat  in  the  New-York  le- 
gislature. But  here,  it  was  not  only  determined  that  Mr. 
Skinner  should  continue  to  hold  his  seat,  to  which  no  one 
at  that  time  objected,  but  that  he  should  be  thrust  into  the 
very  whirlpool — the  vortex — of  party  operations  and  man- 
agement. This  certainly  was  wrong,  and  the  condemna- 
tion of  the  practice  has  been  distinctly  pronounced  by  an 
amendment  to  the  constitution,  which  was  proposed  by 
the  convention  of  1822,  and  sanctioned  by  the  people. 

The  new  council  did  not  meet  until  the  next  winter's 
session. 

On  the  next  day  the  presidential  electors  were  chosen 
without,  I  believe,  any  serious  disagreement.  The  Clin- 
tonians,  however,  held  up  candidates,  but  the  republican 
ticket,  headed  by  William  Floyd  and  Henry  Rutgers,  as 
state  electors,  succeeded  by  a  majority  of  eighteen  in  the 
assembly  and  eight  in  the  senate. 
^  Gen.  Root  brought  in  a  bill  declaring  that  slavery 
could  not  exist  in  this  state,  being  inconsistent  with  its 
constitution  and  laws.  Upon  the  principles  contended  for 
by  Mr.  Root,  the  bill  was,  of  necessity,  declaratory  in  its 
character.  He  contended  that  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence was  the  fundamental  law  of  the  land,  in  all 
those  states  which  claimed,  or  admitted,  that  that  instru- 
ment was  framed  by  their  agentsj  and  that  it  especially 
made  a  part  of  the  constitutional  law  of  New-York,  be- 
cause it  was  actually  incorporated  into  our  constitution. 

That  declaration  declared  that  all  men  were  born  free 
and  equal,  and  that  life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happi- 
ness was  the  inalienable  right  of  all.  It  resulted,  as  a  self 
evident  truth,  that  if  all  men  were  born  free  and  equal  no 
person  could  be  born  a  slave. 

Gen.  Root,  however,  was  not  able  to  get  a  vote  taken 
on  the  merits  of  his  bill.     It  was  postponed. 


1821.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  541 

I  copy  the  following  very  imperfect  sketch  of  the  last 
remarks  of  Mr.  Root,  on  this  subject,  from  the  New- York 
Statesman.  Every  person  who  has  heard  him  when  exci- 
ted in  debate,  will  readily  perceive  that  the  sketch  fur- 
nished by  the  report  cannot  have  done  justice  to  the  spea- 
ker:— 

"  Mr.  Root  hoped  for  the  indulgence  of  the  committee, 
for  once  more  occupying  the  floor  in  defence  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  this  bill.  The  gentlemen  from  Orange,  (Mr. 
3ofland,)  has  cited  the  common  law  of  England,  and  co- 
lonial precedent,  as  authority  for  justifying  and  legalizing 
slavery  in  this  state.  Mr.  R.  said,  that  after  the  revolu- 
tion a  statute  was  passed  by  this  state,  declaring  that  after 
the  first  day  of  May,  1788,  the  common  law  of  England, 
and  the  laws  of  the  colony,  should  not  continue  in  force 
any  farther  than  such  laws  were  applicable  to  our  republi- 
can institutions  and  customs.  But  even  the  common  law 
of  England  does  not  sanction  the  existence  of  slavery  at 
home.  It  was  true,  that  in  the  earlier  periods  of  English 
history,  while  the  feudal  system  was  yet  in  vogue,  a  spe- 
cies of  slaves,  called  villains,  were  held  in  bondage  by  the 
iron-handed  barons.  But  this  barbarous  age  had  gone  by, 
and  Magna  Charta  had  annulled  this  system  of  vassalage. 
Slaves  could  not  now  breath  in  England.  True,  she  gra- 
ciously permitted  slavery  to  exist  in  her  colonies  ;  but  we 
were  not  compelled  to  abide  by  a  custom  which  she  had 
tolerated.  In  reply  to  his  friend  from  New-York,  Mr.  R. 
observed  that  a  very  considerable  proportion  of  our  statutes 
are  merely  declaratory,  setting  forth  principles  which  are 
found  in  the  constitution.  He  wished  gentlemen  to  look 
at  the  preamble  of  the  constitution — there  was  to  be  found 
the  interpretation  of  that  charter  of  our  citizens.  He 
referred  also  to  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  as  con- 
taining the  principles  of  this  bill.  Our  constitution  is 
based  upon  that  Declaration,  which  is  explicit  upon  the 


542  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

equal  rights  of  all  men.  Out  of  that  sacred  soil,  said  Mr. 
R.J  our  constitution,  and  all  our  laws  spring;  and  we  can- 
not tear  up  that  soil  without  defacing  it.  He  inquired,  if 
people  would  confine  themselves  to  paper  constitutions — 
if  they  would  not  look  abroad  beyond  these  narrow  con- 
fines of  right  and  wrong — if  they  would  not  recur  to  first 
principles — to  the  laws  of  nature  and  of  nature's  God — to 
the  foundations  of  equity  and  justice.  Before  these  broad 
and  fundamental  principles,  the  laws  of  men  ought  to 
vanish  like  a  mist  before  the  beams  of  the  sun.  The  gen- 
tleman from  New-York  asks  time  to  read  the  constitution! 
Will  that  gentleman  acknowledge  that  he  is  not  acquaint- 
ed with  the  constitution  1  He  was,  however,  willing  to 
give  time  for  reflection;  but  the  sooner  the  bill  passed,  the 
better  for  the  state.  Mr.  R.  concluded  with  hoping  that 
the  committee  would  pass  the  first  clause  of  the  bill,  and 
then  go  to  dinner." 

It  appeared,  from  a  report  of  the  attorney  general,  that 
he  had  commenced  a  suit  against  the  vice-president,  in  be- 
half of  the  state,  to  recover  the  balance  due  from  him  as 
reported  by  the  comptroller. 

On  the  10th  November  Mr.  Skinner  brought  a  bill  into 
the  senate,  accompanied  with  a  release  of  all  claims  of 
Mr.  Tompkins  against  the  state,  which  bill  declared  the 
acceptance,  on  the  part  of  the  state,  of  the  release,  and 
directed  the  comptroller  to  cause  it  to  be  filed  and  there- 
upon to  balance  his  accounts. 

This  bill,  after  some  feeble  opposition,  rather  to  the 
haste  with  which  action  on  the  bill  was  pressed,  than  to  its 
principles,  passed  both  houses  and  became  a  law.  Thus 
this  question,  which  had  produced  so  much  discussion  in 
the  legislature,  and  controversy  among  the  people,  was 
finally  put  at  rest. 

The  great  and  absorbing  question  which  occupied  the 
attention  of  the  legislature,  and  the  public  generally,  du- 


1821.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  543 

ring  this  sessiorij  was  the  call  of  a  convention  to  amend 
the  constitution.  The  democratic  party  now  held  a  majo- 
rity in  both  branches  of  the  legislature,  and  judging  from 
the  returns  of  members  of  assembly  at  the  spring  elections, 
and  from  more  recent  demonstrations  of  public  opinion  in 
various  parts  of  the  state,  no  discreet  man  could  doubt  but 
that,  if  a  convention  should  be  authorized,  a  large  majo- 
rity of  the  delegates  would  be  republican.  They,  there- 
fore, wisely  determined  to  do  what  I  pressed  upon  the 
Clintonians  to  do,  in  1818  and  1819,  which  was,  to  get  up 
a  convention  while  they  had  the  power  of  controlling  it. 
It  was  one  of  Mr.  Van  Buren's  maxims,  that  that  which 
ought  to  be  done  should  be  done  quickly. — A  sound  max- 
im, applicable  to  most  of  the  concerns  of  human  life. 
Much  may  be  lost,  and  seldom  any  thing  can  be  gained  by 
delay. 

That  part  of  the  governor's  speech  pertaining  to  a  con- 
veniion  was  referred  to  a  committee,  of  which  Mr.  Ul- 
shoeffer  was  chairman.  The  committee,  with  great  promp- 
titude, reported  a  bill  for  the  call  of  a  convention  with 
unlimited  powers,  whose  doings  were  to  be  submitted  to 
the  people,  and  confirmed  or  rejected,  as  they  should  think 
proper. 

This  bill  came  up  for  discussion,  in  the  assembly,  on  the 
15th  November.  All  the  members  professed  to  be  in  fa- 
vor of  the  principle  of  the  bill,  and  the  first  clause  of  it 
passed  unanimously;  but  they  differed  in  relation  to  the 
details,  and  the  proper  time  for  considering  it.  The  Clin- 
tonians wished  to  postpone  action  on  the  question  until 
the  regular  session  in  the  winterj  and  Mr.  J.  C.  Spencer, 
from  Ontario,  contended  that  the  counties  ought  to  be 
represented  in  a  ratio  proportioned  to  the  present  number 
of  inhabitants,  which  might  be  done  if  action  on  the  sub- 
ject should  be  put  off  till  the  next  winter,  because  the  re- 
turns of  the  United  States  census,  then  being  taken,  would 


544  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [IS-^l. 

be  before  them  in  February.  He  showed  that  some  of  the 
western  counties  would  then  be  entitled  to  nearly  double 
their  present  representation.  Mr.  Ford  argued  that  the 
question  whether  there  should  or  should  not  be  a  conven- 
tion with  unlimited  powers,  ought  first  to  be  submitted  to 
the  people. 

It  is  due  to  candor  and  truth  to  state,  that  the  Clinto- 
nians,  as  a  party,  were,  notwithstanding  their  vote  on  the 
first  clause  of  the  bill,  opposed  to  any  convention  with 
unlimited  powers.  They  believed  that  the  action  of  the 
convention  would  be  exclusively  controlled  by  the  repub- 
lican party,  and  they  feared  that  would  be  done,  which 
eventually  was  done,  namely,  that  the  judiciary  system 
would  be  abolished  and  a  new  one  established,  by  which 
the  judges  and  chancellor  would  be,  if  I  may  be  allowed 
to  coin  a  word,  constitutionized  out  of  oflSce.  Notwith- 
standing the  legal  learning  and  talents,  and  integrity  of 
the  judges  of  the  supreme  court,  much  of  popular  preju- 
dice had  accumulated  against  them,  principally,  if  not 
solely,  in  consequence  of  their  interference  with  political 
concerns;  and,  as  the  judges  belonged  to  different  parties, 
citizens,  who  were  members  of  each  party, had  felt  dissat- 
isfied w^ith  such  occasional  interference.  There  were,  too, 
a  great  number  of  ambitious  young  lawyers  in  the  state 
who  acted  with  the  democratic  party,  who,  it  may  fairly  be 
presumed,  had  their  eyes  upon  some  of  the  great  offices 
then  secured  to  the  incumbents  by  the  constitution,  and 
w^ho  did  not  fail  to  encourage  those  jealousies  and  fan  the 
embers  of  animosity  against  the  judges  and  chancellor. 
Of  all  this  the  Clintonians  in  the  assembly  were  fully 
aware,  and  they  therefore  made  use  of  every  effort  to  pre- 
vent an  immediate  call  of  a  convention.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is,  in  my  judgment,  very  evident  that  the  leading 
republicans  would  not  have  consented  to  the  proposed 
convention  had  not  Mr.  Clinton  been  re-elected,  and  had 


1821.]  OF    NEW- YORK.  545 

they  not  entertained  a  well  founded  belief  that  they  could 
control  the  essential  action  of  a  convention  when  formed. 
I  make  this  assertion  from  my  knowledge  of  the  men, 
and  from  the  fact  that  until  the  present  session  they 
apparently,  by  a  tacit  understanding  among  themselves, 
disagreed  as  to  the  details  of  a  bill  for  the  organization 
of  a  convention.  In  justice  to  Gen.  Root,  however,  I 
ought  to  remark  that  his  action  on  that  question  for  three 
successive  sessions  was  perfectly  uniform  and  consistent; 
but  the  chairman  of  the  committee  Mr.  UlshocfFer,  had  the 
session  next  preceding  the  present,  contended  that  the 
question  of  convention  or  no  convention  ought  first  to  be 
submitted  to  the  people,  and  had  himself  offered  the  very 
amendment  to  the  bill  then  under  consideration,  now  pro- 
posed and  advocated  by  Mr.  Ford,  and  which  Mr.  Ul- 
shoefFer  now  vehemently  opposed. 

All  attempts  to  postpone,  or  alter  the  material  features 
of  the  bill,  by  the  minority,  both  in  the  senate  and  assem- 
bly, finally  failed,  and  it  passed  both  houses  on  the  eigh- 
teenth of  November. 

In  the  council  of  revision,  the  bill  was  considered  on 
the  20th  of  November.  Mr.  Justice  Van  Ness  and  Mr. 
Justice  Piatt,  were  both  at  that  time  absept,  holding  cir- 
cuit courts.  There  is,  in  my  mind,  little  doubt  that  it  had 
been  pre-determined  by  a  majority  of  the  council  to  veto 
the  bill;  and  it  was  supposed  that  all  the  members  of  that 
body,  except  Judge  Yates,  would  concur  in  such  vote. 
None  of  the  members  felt  a  deeper  interest  than  Judges 
Van  Ness  and  Piatt  in  preventing  a  convention,  but  they 
probably  were  desirous  of  avoiding  any  direct  personal 
action  on  the  question,  and  it  is  not  at  all  improbable  that 
the  arrangement,  which  at  this  moment  called  them  in  the 
discharge  of  their  official  duties  from  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment, may  have  been  made  at  their  instance. 

35 


546  POLITICAL    HISTOR-i  [1821. 

Inasmuch  as  the  governor's  political  existence  depended 
on  the  popular  will,  and  it  was  pretty  well  known  that  an 
immense  majority  of  the  people  were  for  a  convention, 
either  with  or  without  limited  powers,  and  more  especially 
as  the  governor  was  committed  in  favor  of  a  convention 
with  unlimited  powers,  both  he  and  his  friends  were  desi- 
rous that  he  should  not  be  compelled  to  vote  on  the  bill, 
and  at  any  rate  that  he  should  not  vote  against  it. 

The  members  of  the  council  who  were  present  at 
the  time  the  convention  bill  was  considered,  were  Gov. 
Clinton,  Chancellor  Kent,  Chief  Justice  Spencer,  Judge 
Yates  and  Judge  Woodworth. 

The  Chancellor  was  called  on  for  his  opinion,  and  de- 
clared it  against  the  bill,  and  the  Chief  Justice  concurred 
with  him.  Judge  Yates  voted  in  favor  of  it;  but  when 
Judge  Woodworth  was  called  on,  who  all  supposed  would 
vote  against  the  bill,  to  the  utter  astonishment  of  the 
chancellor  and  chief  justice,  as  well  as  the  extreme  em- 
barrassment of  the  governor,  he  voted  in  favor  of  it. 
This  produced  a  tie  in  the  council  and  compelled  the 
governor  to  give  a  casting  vote.  He  did  so,  and  the  bill 
was  rejected. 

The  propriety  of  passing  the  convention  bill  did,  be- 
yond all  doubt,  present  a  question  upon  which  intelligent, 
honest  and  patriotic  men  might  differ;  and  one  can  hardly 
perceive  why  Judge  Woodworth  should  have  been  con- 
demned as  acting  from  improper  motives  when  he  voted 
in  favor  of  it.  His  conduct  nevertheless  was  animadverted 
upon  with  great  severity,  and  the  purity  of  his  motives 
impeached. 

The  reasons  of  this  attack  upon  the  Judge  were,  that  he 
had  but  a  short  time  before  claimed  to  be  a  prominent 
member  of  the  Clintonian  party;  that  he  had  solicited  his 
appointment  as  judge,  upon  the  ground  that  he  was  the 
political  friend  of  the  governor;  that   his  claim  had  been 


1821.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  547 

allowed  by  the  governor  and  council  of  appointment,  m 
preference  to  other  candidates,  admitted  to  possess  high 
standing  as  lawyers,  and  a  high  grade  of  talent;  that  the 
passage  of  a  convention  bill  at  that  time  had  become  a 
party  question,  and  that  Judge  Woodworth  ought  not 
at  such  a  juncture  to  have  abandoned  his  political  friends, 
through  whose  power  and  influence  he  had  received  a 
high  and  important  office  from  which  he  could  not  be 
removed. 

Another  imputation  was  made  against  Judge  Wood- 
worth,  which  if  unjust  was  extremely  cruel. 

Judge  Woodworth  had  been  sued  in  the  supreme  court  as 
endorser  of  a  promissory  note  for  several  thousand  dollars, 
for  James  Kane,  for  whose  benefit  the  note  was  endorsed, 
and  who  had  become  insolvent.  He  set  up  in  his  defence 
that  the  body  of  the  note  had  been  materially  altered  after 
he  endorsed  it.  The  supreme  court  gave  judgment  against 
the  Judge;  and  he  had  brought  from  that  judgment,  error 
to  the  court  for  correction  of  errors;  which  matter  was 
then  pending  before  the  court  of  errors.  It  was  alleged 
in  private  circles  and  publicly  talked  of,  that  Judge  Wood- 
worth  was  induced  to  give  the  vote  above  referred  to  in 
the  council  of  revision,  in  the  hope,  or  in  accordance 
with  a  secret  understanding  with  the  party  in  the  majority 
in  the  senate,  that  that  majority  would  decide  that  the 
judgment  rendered  against  him  by  the  supreme  court 
should  be  reversed. 

Before  I  go  further  I  may  perhaps  as  well  state  that  the 
cause  came  on  for  argument  in  the  court  of  errors,  in  Marchj 
1821.  The  reportof  the  case  will  be  found  in  19  John.  391; 
Woodworth  vs.  Bank  of  America.  The  cause  was  argued 
by  Talcott  and  Van  Buren  for  the  plaintiff  in  error,  and 
Hoffman  and  Henry  for  the  defendants.  The  opinion  of  the 
majority  of  the  court  was  delivered  by  senator  Skinner 
in  favor  of  reversing  the  judgment,and   with  him  seven- 


548  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

teen  senators   concurred.     The   chancellor   delivered   an 
opinion  in  favor  of  affirming  the  judgment,  and  with  him 
nine   senators    concurred.     Every   senator   who  was  for 
affirming  the  judgment  of  the  supreme  court  were  Clinto- 
nians,  and  every  one  who  voted  for  reversing,  were  political 
opponents  to  the  governor.*  This  circumstance  gave  color 
to  the  allegation   that   the  judge,  in  giving  his  vote  as  a 
member  of  the  council  of  revision,  was  governed  by  im- 
proper motives.     I  was  not  present  during  the  whole  of 
the   argument,   and    therefore,    according   to    established 
usage,  did  not  vote  on  the  question.     It  is  however,  per- 
haps due,  in  frankness  and  candor,  to  Judge  Woodworth 
and  the  party  in  the  majority,  to  state  that  at  that  time  I 
expressed  an  opinion,  and  have  ever  since  retained  it,  that 
Judge  Woodworth's  defence  was  a  good  and  valid  one, 
and  that  the  judgment  of  the  supreme  court  was  wrong. 
The  note,  when  endorsed  by  Woodworth,  was  not  made 
payable  at  any  particular  place.     Afte.r  he  endorsed  it 
Mr.  Kane  added  on  the  margin  of  the  note  the  words 
"payable  at  the  Bank  of  America."     Before  those  words 
were  added,  the  endorser  could  not  be  made  liable  unless 
a  demand  had  been  made  of  the  maker  personally,  or  at 
his  usual  place  of  residenoe.     By  adding  those  words,  (if, 
as  the  supreme  court  assumed,  they  made  a  part  of  the 
note,)  the  liability  of  the  endorser  was  increased,  or  rather 
the  condition  on  which  the  endorser  might  become  liable 
was  altered-  for  he  then  became  chargable  with  the  debt 
by  a  demand  of  payment  of  the  note  at  the  Bank  of  Ame- 
rica, and  notice  to  the  endorser  of  non-payment.     This,  I 
then  thought,  and    so  informed   my  friends,  and  I  now 
think,  was  such  an  alteration  of  the  note  and  of  the  condi- 
tions upon  which  the  endorser  became  liable,  as,  (being 
done  without  his  consent,)  exonerated  him.     But  I  do  not 
mean  to  discuss  the  merits  of  the  question.     I  may  be 
wrpng   and  when  such  distinguished  jurists  as  Chancellor 


1821.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  549 

Kent,  Chief  Justice  Spencer,  and  Judges  Van  Ness  and 
Piatt  entertain  a  contrary  opinion,  I  certainly  have  good 
reasons  to  doubt  the  soundness  of  my  own  opinion. 

Is  it  necessary  to  impute  improper  motives  to  Judge 
Woodworth  for  his  vote  on  the  convention  bill  1 

It  surely  does  not  follow  that  because  he  believed  De 
Witt  Clinton  a  more  suitable  man  for  governor  than  Dan- 
iel D.  Tompkins,  he  was  bound  to  be  of  opinion  that  a 
bill  for  calling  a  convention,  which  had  passed  the  two 
houses  of  the  legislature,  would  be  pernicious  if  it  became 
a  law.  Were  the  two  questions,  on  their  merits,  at  all 
connected  "?  Gov.  Clinton  himself  had  recommended  the 
very  measure  which  the  bill  before  the  council  provided 
for  carrying  into  effect.  True,  he  had  advised  that  the 
question  whether  a  convention  should  or  should  not  be 
called,  ought  first  to  be  submitted  to  the  people.  But  the 
question  had  been  several  years  before  the  New- York 
public;  scarcely  a  word  had  been  uttered  from  any  quar- 
ter against  the  measure;  the  governor,  as  I  have  before 
stated,  had  recommended  it;  and,  within  a  few  days,  the 
members  of  the  assembly,  consisting  of  federalists,  Clinto- 
nians  and  Bucktails  fresh  from  the  people,  had  unani- 
mously recorded  their  votes  in  favor  of  the  principle  of 
the  bill.  Why,  then,  should  Judge  Woodworth  be 
charged  with  being  governed  by  corrupt  motives  in  yield- 
ing his  assent  to  it  1 

The  case  of  Judge  Woodworth  was,  in  my  judgment, 
very  diflferent  from  that  of  Mr.  Childs,  Gen.  Mooers,  or 
Mr.  Evans.  They  were  elected  by  the  Clintonians,  and 
immediately  combined  with  those  who  opposed  their  elec- 
tion to  exclude  the  party,  to  whom  they  owed  their  elec- 
tion, from  all  governmental  patronage.  Mr.  Woodworth 
differed  with  his  political  friends,  not  about  the  principle, 
but  the  details  of  a  proposed  law. 


560  POLITICAL     HISTOEY  [1S21. 

The  objections  of  the  council  of  revision  were  drawn 
by  Chancellor  Kent,  with  his  usual  ability.  Even  the 
council  admitted  that  the  constitution  ought  to  be  revised, 
and  therefore,  of  course,  did  not  contend  against  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  billj  but  they  alleged,  first — that  the  legisla- 
ture had  no  constitutional  authority  to  create  a  convention 
with  unlimited  power,  even  to  propose  amendments  to  the 
constitution.  Second — that,  if  they  had  such  power,  the 
bill  ought  to  have  required  the  convention  to  submit  their 
amendments  separately  to  the  people,  and  not  in  gross; 
and  the  council  argued  with  great  force,  that  if  the  people 
were  competent  to  decide  on  the  amendments  when  taken 
all  together,  they  were  most  assuredly  competent  to  de- 
cide on  each  separate  amendment.  In  other  words,  if 
they  were  capable  of  deciding  on  the  whole  of  an  instru- 
ment, they  were  capable  of  deciding  on  all  the  parts  of 
which  that  instrument  was  composed. 

On  Monday  evening,  the  20th  November,  the  bill  was 
returned  to  the  assembly  by  the  council  of  revision,  with 
their  objections.  Much  agitation  and  excitement  prevailed 
in  the  house  upon  the  occasion.  Mr.  UlshoefFer,  however, 
after  a  very  decent,  and  considering  the  feeling  which 
then  prevailed,  moderate  address,  moved  that  the  bill,  to- 
gether with  the  reasons  assigned  by  the  council  of  revision 
against  its  becoming  a  law,  be  laid  on  the  table;  and  the 
house  unanimously  sustained  the  motion. 

This  movement  of  the  council  produced  consequences 
directly  different  from  what  were  intended.  The  object 
was  to  preserve  the  supreme  court,  and  it  accelerated  its 
destruction.  The  chancellor  and  judges  were  charged 
with  exercising  an  almost  arbitrary  power,  with  which,  by 
the  old  constitution,  they  were  invested,  to  defeat  the  de- 
clared will  of  the  people.  It  did  not  require  any  special 
gift  of  prophecy  to  predict  what  would  be  the  result  of  a 
contest,  in  a  free  country,  between  four  men  on  the  one 


1821.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  551 

side  and  the  people  on  the  other.  Immediately  after  the 
adjournment  of  the  assembly  a  meeting  was  held  at  Skin- 
ner's Mansion  House,  of  the  members  of  the  legislature 
opposed  to  the  details  of  the  convention  bill,  although  I 
am  not  aware  that  any  of  the  Clintonian  senators  attended 
on  that  occasion,  at  which  a  committee,  consisting  of  John 
C.  Spencer,  Samuel  M.  Hopkins,  Herman  Gansevoort, 
Rowland  Fish  and  Myron  Holley,  were  appointed,  and 
who  addressed  their  constituents  on  the  subject  of  the  bill 
which  had  been  vetoed  by  the  council  of  revision.  The 
address  was  drawn,  as  I  presume,  by  Mr.  John  C.  Spen- 
cer; it  evinced  great  ability,  and  among  other  things, 
pointed  out  clearly  and  forcibly  the  inequality  of  repre- 
sentation in  the  convention  proposed  by  the  bill;  but  the 
current  in  favor  of  a  convention  was  too  strong  to  be 
checked  in  its  progress.  The  public  mind  had,  by  this 
time,  received  an  impression  that  Mr,  Spencer,  and  those 
acting  with  him,  were,  at  heart,  opposed  to  any  conven- 
tion which  should  be  vested  with  powers  adequate  to  what 
it  was  deemed  the  emergency  required,  and  the  democrat- 
ic party  were  not  then  in  a  humor  to  listen  to  any  reason- 
ing coming  from  a  source  so  suspicious. 

Congress  assembled  in  December,  and  Mr.  Clay,  who 
had  for  many  sessions  been  speaker  of  the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives, resigned  his  office,  and  his  seat  as  a  member  of 
congress. 

Mr.  John  W.  Taylor,  of  Saratoga,  an  old  and  respecta- 
ble member  of  that  body,  was  proposed  by  the  members 
from  the  northern  and  middle  states  as  a  suitable  person 
for  his  successor.  The  southern  members  were  divided. 
Some  were  for  Mr.  Nelson  of  Virginia,  and  some  for  Mr. 
Lowndes  of  South-Carolina.  Mr.  Taylor  was  eventually 
elected  by  a  small  majority.  The  contest  seemed  to  be 
rather  a  sectional  one,  and  particularly  between  the  slave 
holding  and  non  slave  holding  states,  except  as  respected 


552  political'  history  [1821. 

the  opponents  of  Mr.  Clinton  in  the  state  of  New-York. 
The  members  belonging  to  that  party,  from  this  state, 
generally  voted  against  him.  Nothing  exhibits  more  dis- 
tinctly the  proscriptive  spirit  of  party  than  this  opposition 
of  the  New-York  members  to  Mr.  Taylor.  He  had  been 
a  member  of  our  legislature  in  1812,  and  had  stood  firm 
against  the  corrupt  efforts  of  the  applicants  for  a  charter 
to  the  Bank  of  America.  He  had,  on  all  occasions,  as  a 
member  of  the  assembly,  faithfully  sustained  the  republi- 
can interest  in  the  state.  In  1813  he  entered  congress,  at 
which  time  he  withdrew  himself  from  the  local  contests 
which  prevailed  here,  and  in  the  national  legislature  uni- 
formly supported  the  democratic  party,  and  particularly 
the  measures  of  the  administration  during  the  war. 

The  speaker  of  the  house  of  representatives,  for  the 
time  being,  as  every  one  knows,  holds  a  powerful  influ- 
ence in  the  action  of  that  controlling  branch  of  our  na- 
tional legislature,  and  gives  a  very  great  impetus  to  the 
political  power  of  the  state  of  which  he  is  an  inhabitant. 
But  Mr.  Taylor  had  declined  to  make  war  upon  Gov.  Clin- 
ton, and  his  colleagues  who  had  opposed  Clinton's  re-elec- 
tion, utterly  regardless  of  the  consideration  I  have  just 
stated,  zealously  resisted  his  election,  solely  and  exclu- 
sively on  the  ground  that  he  had  voted  for  Mr.  Clinton  as 
governor. 

It  will  be  recollected  that  the  senate,  on  the  15th  No- 
vember, passed  a  resolution  calling  on  the  governor  for 
such  information  as  he  possessed  relative  to  the  interfe 
rence  of  the  general  government,  or  its  officers,  as  an 
organized  and  disciplined  corps,  in  our  elections.  To  this 
the  governor,  on  the  morning  of  the  10th  inst.,  sent  the 
following  reply: — 

"  TO  THE  SENATE." 

"Gentlemen — Fully  appreciating  the  patriotic  solici- 
tude of  the  senate  to  prevent  all  unwarrantable  intrusions 


1821.]  OF     NEW-YORK.  553 

in  the  political  affairs  of  the  state,  I  have  received  their 
application  for  information  on  this  subject  with  great 
pleasure,  and  I  shall,  in  due  time,  make  them  a  communi- 
cation, w^hich,  I  trust,  will  be  satisfactory  in  its  nature  and 
salutary  in  its  tendency. 

DE  WITT  CLINTON." 

In  the  speech  of  the  governor  he  did  not  affirm,  although 
he  clearly  intimated,  that  the  officers  of  the  national  go- 
vernment had  interfered  in  the  late  election,  and  he  then 
states  hypothetically,  that,  "  if^  as  an  organized  corpSy^ 
they  shall  so  interfere,  he  trusted  that  there  would  be 
found  a  becoming  disposition  in  the  people  to  resist  such 
alarming  attempts.  He  undoubtedly  considered,  and  it 
strikes  me  he  had  a  right  so  to  consider,  the  suggestion  as 
a  mere  opinion  founded  upon  what  he  supposed  the  Uni- 
ted States  had  evinced  to  be  their  general  policy — an 
opinion  which  any  one  had  a  right  to  controvert  and  show 
to  be  erroneous.  He  did  not  mean  it  as  an  affirmation, 
the  proof  of  which  he  could  in  fairness  be  called  on  to 
produce  by  documentary  evidence.  The  senate,  however, 
chose  to  claim  that  he  had  taken  the  latter  ground.  They 
probably  did  not  imagine  he  would  have  replied  at  all  to 
the  resolution,  and  in  that  case  they  meant  to  assert  that 
he  had  put  forth  a  false  accusation  against  the  national 
government.  The  senate,  in  acting  upon  the  supposition 
that  Mr.  Clinton  would  evade  a  contest,  entirely  mistook 
their  man.  No  point  is  more  prominent  in  Mr.  Clinton's 
character,  than  a  constant  readiness  for  combat  with  a  po- 
litical opponent.  The  bitter  irony  contained  in  the  answer, 
and  the  menacing  attitude  assumed  by  the  governor  in 
respect  to  the  majority  of  the  senate,  extremely  annoyed 
them.  In  order  to  carry  on  the  war  on  their  part,  they, 
on  the  evening  of  the  20th  November,  introduced  the  fol- 
lowing preamble  and  resolution: — 


554  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

"  Tn  Senate — Nov.  20, 1820. — Whereas  his  excellency 
the  governor,  in  his  reply  to  the  call  of  the  senate  for  in- 
formation, relative  to  the  general  government,  or  its  offi- 
cers, as  an  organized  corps,  interfering  in  our  elections, 
has  not  furnished  the  senate  with  any  evidence  in  support 
of  such  charges.  And  whereas  it  is  highly  improper  that 
the  chief  magistrate  of  the  state  should  criminate  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  general  government,  without  ample 
testimony  in  his  possession,  by  reason  whereof  the  good 
people  of  this  state  may  have  their  confidence  in  the  gene- 
ral government  greatly  impaired.     Therefore, 

"  Resolved^  That  the  senate  repose  the  strictest  confi- 
dence in  the  patriotism  and  integrity  of  the  general  go- 
vernment, and  will  not  change  such  opinion,  or  yield  to 
any  insinuations  against  such  administration,  but  upon  full 
and  satisfactory  testimony." 

This  resolution  was  proposed  by  Mr.  P.  R.  Livingston. 
It  was  not  anticipated  by  the  governor  or  his  friends. 
The  only  indication  of  an  extraordinary  movement  was, 
that  when  the  evening  session  of  the  senate  commenced, 
the  lobby  and  galleries  were  crowded  with  an  unusual 
number  of  spectators,  who  were  observed  to  be  composed 
almost  exclusively  of  citizens  who  had  distinguished  them- 
selves by  their  opposition  to  Gov.  Clinton.  As  the  mo- 
tion was  entirely  unexpected,  no  member  of  the  opposition 
was  prepared  to  resist  it  by  any  thing  like  an  argument. 
Mr.  Livingston  made  a  speech  in  favor  of  the  resolution. 
He  declaimed,  with  his  usual  zeal,  against  this  act  of  the 
governor  of  the  state  of  New-York,  and  represented  it 
almost  as  treason  against  his  liege  lord,  the  president  of 
the  United  States;  and  he  adjured  all  true  republicans  to 
unite  with  him  in  denouncing  a  declaration  by  the  execu- 
tive of  this  state  so  utterly  unfounded,  uncalled  for,  and 
indefensible. 


1821.]  or   NEW-yoRK.  555 

It  was  urged  in  vain  that  the  manner  in  which  the 
charge  was  intimated,  did  not  warrant  the  senate  in  calling 
on  the  governor  for  documentary  proofs;  that,  if  the 
speech  would  fairly  bear  the  construction  for  M'hich  the 
mover  of  the  resolution  contended,  only  five  days  had 
elapsed  since  the  original  resolution  had  been  delivered  to 
the  governor,  and  one  of  those  days  was  Sunday;  that,  if 
nothing  but  documentary  evidence  would  satisfy  the  sen- 
ate, it  was  evident  that  if,  as  was  alleged,  the  action  of 
the  general  government  had  extended  all  over  the  state, 
the  evidence  of  improper  conduct  must  be  collected,  from 
individuals  residing  in  different  and  various  counties,  and, 
of  course,  that  not  only  weeks,  but  months  must  elapse 
before  that  evidence  could  be  obtained,  collected  and  di- 
gested, in  a  form  suitable  to  be  presented  to  the  senate. 
It  was  further  stated,  that  the  governor,  by  his  last  com- 
munication, had  committed  himself  to  furnish  the  evidence, 
and  that  the  adoption  of  the  proposed  preamble  and  reso- 
lution would,  on  the  part  of  the  senate,  be  prejudging  the 
case  before  evidence  was  furnished  them.  The  preamble 
and  resolution  was  adopted  by  the  usual  party  vote;  and 
the  clerk  was  directed  to  deliver  a  copy  of  it  to  the  governor. 

The  next  morning  he  sent  to  the  senate  the  following 
brief  but  indignant  reply: — 

"TO  THE  SENATE." 

"  Gentlemen — I  have  this  moment  received  a  resolution 
of  your  honorable  body,  which,  as  well  as  the  one  to 
which  it  refers,  I  shall  fully  notice  at  the  next  meeting  of 
the  legislature:  and  shall  therefore,  at  this  late  hour,  pass 
it  over  with  the  expression  of  my  sincere  regret  that  any 
branch  of  the  legislature  should,  in  so  unprecedented  a 
manner,  lose  sight  of  the  respect  due  to  itself,  and  the 
courtesy  due  to  a  co-ordinate  department  of  the  govern- 
ment. DE  WITT  CLINTON." 


556  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1821. 

On  the  motion  of  Mr.  Skinner,  this  message  was  direct- 
ed to  be  returned  to  the  governor;  seventeen  senators 
voting  in  favor  of  it.  The  legislature  on  the  same  day, 
and  indeeed  in  a  few  moments  afterwards,  adjourned  until 
the  next  January.  On  account  of  the  collisions  between 
the  two  houses  and  the  council  of  revision,  with  respect 
to  the  convention  bill,  and  especially  on  account  of  the 
proceedings  I  have  last  related;  the  parties  separated  in 
ill  humor,  and  with  bad  feelings  towards  each  other.  It 
will  be  recollected  that  Mr.  Van  Buren  had  ceased  to  be 
a  member  of  the  senate,  notwithstanding  he  was  the 
acknowledged  leader  of  the  democratic  partyj  his  bland 
and  conciliatory  manner,  his  caution  and  his  aversion  to 
personal  controversies  would  have  greatly  assuaged  if  not 
prevented  the  violent  personal  animosities  which  were  ex- 
cited during  this  short  session. 

While  I  entirely  disapprove  of  the  course  taken  by  the 
senate  in  relation  to  that  part  of  the  governor's  speech 
which  protested  against  the  interference  of  the  agents  of 
the  national  government  in  our  state  elections,  I  am  com- 
pelled to  say,  that  I  think  the  intimation  was,  to  say  the 
least,  impolitic  on  his  part. 

He  must  have  known,  that  there  was  not  at  that  time 
the  least  inclination  among  the  people  of  this,  or  any 
other  state  in  the  union  to  oppose  the  administration  of 
Mr.  Monroe.  He  had  been  very  tolerant  towards  the 
federalists,  and  that  party  felt  no  disposition  to  wage  a 
hopeless  warfare  against  him.  Our  foreign  relations  were 
prosperous,  and  our  commerce  was  in  a  flourishing  condi- 
tion. There  was  no  just  cause  of  complaint  against  the 
measures  of  the  general  government,  and  although,  many 
ardent  democratic  politicians  were  not  well  pleased  with 
the  president;  yet,  they  did  not  choose  publicly  to  de- 
nounce him.  He  was  not  a  man  of  vigorous  intellect,  but 
he  was  discreet   and    prudent.     It  was  owing  to  his  dis- 


1821.1  OF    NEW- YORK.  557 

-'  t 

cietion,  and  to  the  unusual  political  calm  which  prevailed 
during  the  eight  years  in  which  he  presided,  that  no  pre- 
sident, with  the  exception  of  Gen.  Washington,  ever  sailed 
so  smoothly  through  two  presidential  terms  as  he  did. 
He  had  no  warm  friends,  or  open  enemies.  He  was 
in  1820,  re-elected  without  opposition.  What  could  Mr. 
Clinton  hope  to  gain  by  attacking  such  an  administra- 
tion ? 

On  the  9th  of  January,  1821,  the  legislature  again  met, 
and  on  the  seventeenth  of  the  same  month  the  governor 
sent  to  the  assembly  a  message,  accompanied  with  a  great 
number  of  affidavits,  certificates  and  letters,  showing  the 
interference  of  national  officers,  and  in  some  instances 
very  strong  presumptive  proof  that  the  patronage  of  the 
general  government  had  been  used  for  the  purpose  of  en- 
couraging opposition  to  his  re-election.  The  documents 
were  very  voluminous  and  were  sent  to  the  assembly  in 
a  bag,  for  the  purpose  of  more  conveniently  transporting 
the  papers.  Hence  the  message  received  the  name  of 
The  Green  Bag  Message. 

Among  a  variety  of  other  matters,  it  appeared  that  Col. 
John  P.  Decatur,  naval  store  keeper  at  Brooklyn,  and 
some  other  United  States  officers,  had  made  great  efforts  at 
the  late  election  to  defeat  the  Clintonian  ticket  in  the 
county  of  Kings,  and  that  other  United  St^s  officers 
had  been  very  active  in  various  parts  of  the  state. 

Among  the  documents  contained  in  the  green  bag,  was 
a  letter  from  Mr.  Van  Buren  to  Henry  Meigs,  then  a 
member  of  congress  from  the  city  of  New- York,  recom- 
mending by  name  the  removal  of  several  Clintonian  depu- 
ty post  masters,  and  the  appointment  of  men  of  opposite 
political  sentiments  in  their  places.  The  letter  was  evi- 
dently written  in  great  haste.  He  says,  "  unless  we  can 
alarm  them"  (the  Clintonians,)  "  by  two  or  three  prompt 
removals,  there  is  no  limiting  the  injurious  consequences 


558  POLITICAL     HISTORY  [1821. 

that  may  result  from  it."  He  adds,  "  If  any  thing  is 
done,  let  it  be  done  quickly."  He  does  not  charge  the 
incumbents  with  any  misconduct.  Two  of  the  four  post 
masters  whose  removal  he  advised,  were  instantly  dis- 
placed. This  letter  was  dated  the  4th  of  April,  1820.  It 
was  at  the  time  of  its  publication,  and  has  since  been  a 
subject  of  considerable  animadversion,  much  more  in  my 
judgment  that  it  deserved.  Mr.  Van  Buren  did  no  more 
than  other  party  men,  from  the  organization  of  the  govern- 
ment, had  done  before  him.  He  recommended  the  removal 
of  his  enemies  and  the  appointment  of  his  friends.  The 
error  was  in  the  practice  which  had  been  tolerated  by  all 
descriptions  of  of  men  for  many  years. 

Mr.  Clinton  and  Judge  Spencer  themselves  had  frequent- 
ly exerted  their  influence  with  those  who  administered  the 
national  government,  in  the  same  manner  as  Mr.  Van  Bu- 
ren did  his  on  the  present  occasion.  The  green  bag  mes- 
sage and  documents  were  referred  to  a  joint  committee  of 
the  two  houses. 

Immediately  after  the  legislature  had  organized,  the 
committee  of  the  assembly,  to  whom  the  objections  of  the 
council  of  revision  to  the  convention  bill  had  been  referred, 
made  a  long  and  laborious  report.  The  report  criticised 
with  great  severity  the  objections  of  the  council,  animad- 
verted upon  the  conduct  of  some  its  members,  and  hardly 
abstained  from  impugning  their  motives.  The  rejected 
bill,  together  with  the  objections  of  the  council  of  revi- 
sion, and  the  report  of  the  select  committee,  were  referred 
to  a  committee  of  the  whole  house. 

Soon  after  the  commencement  of  the  session,  and  I  be 
lieve,  on  the  second  or  third  day,  Mr.  John  C.  Spencer 
asked  leave  to  bring  in  a  bill  providing  for  a  convention 
to  amend  the  constitution.  The  principal  features  in  this 
bill,  which  differed  from  that  which  had  been  rejected  by 
the  council  were, 


1821.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  559 

First.  It  provided  that  the  people  at  the  next  annual 
election  should  vote  on  the  question  for  or  against  a  con- 
vention. 

Second.  That  if  a  majority  of  the  electors  should  vote 
for  a  convention,  the  governor  should  issue  a  proclama- 
tion announcing  the  fact,  and  thereupon  in  the  month  of 
June  following,  delegates  should  be  chosen  from  the  several 
counties  who  should  compose  the  convention. 

Third.  That  the  number  of  delegates  to  be  chosen  by 
each  county  should  be  in  proportion  to  the  population, 
to  be  ascertained  by  the  census  then  lately  taken. 

Fourth.  That  the  amendments  recommended  by  the  con- 
vention should  be  separate  and  distinct,  and  severally  sub- 
mitted to  the  people,  and  be  respectively  confirmed  or 
rejected,  as  a  majority  of  the  people  should  decide  by 
their  votes. 

This  project,  which  seems  to  be  a  reasonable  one,  and 
would  probably  have  been  adopted  had  it  been  proposed  be- 
fore the  minds  of  men  became  highly  excited  and  exasper- 
ated, was  not  listened  to  by  the  majority.  Indeed,  leave  to 
bring  in  a  bill  containing  this  scheme,  was  refused  to  Mr. 
S.  upon  the  plea  that  the  bill  then  before  the  house  ought 
first  to  be  disposed  of. 

A  long  and  exciting  debate  followed  on  the  orignal  bill, 
and  the  objections  of  the  council  of  revision,  without 
coming  to  any  decision;  but  after  many  days,  the  ques- 
tion was  finally  taken  upon  the  bill;  and  it  was  lost,  more 
than  one-third  of  the  members  voting  against  it.  The 
committee  on  the  subject  were  then  directed  to  bring  in  a 
new  bill,  which  they  accordingly  didj  but  it  was  in  sub- 
stance the  same  as  the  bill  which  had  been  rejected.  Af- 
ter this  second  bill  had  been  discussed  for  some  time,  Mr. 
Burt  offered  an  amendment  to  it  which  obviated  the  prin- 
cipal objection  of  the  council.  By  this  amendment,  the 
question    of  convention  or  no  convention  was  to  be  sub- 


560  POLITICAL     HISTORY  fl821. 

mitted  to  the  people  at  the  next  annual  election.  This 
movement  presented  a  new,  though  perhaps  not  a  very 
unusual  course  of  party  operations. 

The  democratic  party  in  the  legislature  were  determined 
on  passing  a  convention  bill,  but  they  well  knew  that  no 
such  bill  could  be  passed  by  a  majority  of  two-thirds  of 
both  houses,  unless  it  should  be  so  drawn  as  not  to  be 
obnoxious  to  the  views  expressed  by  the  council  of  revi- 
sion; they,  however,  did  not  wish  to  appear  to  concede 
that  the  ground  taken  by  the  council  was  correct.  On  the 
other  hand,  although  the  Clintonians  professed  a  desire 
for  a  convention,  if  the  consent  of  the  people  could  first 
be  obtained;  their  leaders  at  that  time  really  wished  to 
prevent  a  convention  upon  any  terms.  They  therefore 
were  anxious  that  the  majority  should  hold  the  attitude 
they  had  taken  against  the  principles  put  forth  by  the 
council  of  revision.  Mr.  Burt  was  known  to  be  in  full 
confidence  with  the  democratic  leaders  in  the  assemblj'', 
and  there  is  not,  in  my  mind,  a  shadow  of  doubt  but  that 
he  brought  forward  this  amendment  after  consultation 
with  them  and  in  accordance  with  their  wishes;  and  yet 
Mr.  Ulshoeffer,  Mr.  Sharp,  Mr.  Remain,  and  I  believe 
every  leading  democrat  in  the  house,  with  the  exception 
of  General  Root,  voted  against  Mr.  Burt's  amendment, 
and  every  Clintonian,  with  the  exception  of  Mr.  Bough- 
ton  of  Ontario,  voted  for  it.  There  were  for  the  amend- 
ment, eighty-one — against  it,  twenty-five.  In  this  form 
the  bill  passed  both  houses. 

A  regard  to  truth,compels  me  to  state  one  other  fact.  After 
Mr.  Burt's  amendment  had  been  adopted,  and  while  the  bill 
was  in  the  house  of  assembly,  a  prominent  Clintonian 
member  of  the  assembly  stated  in  the  presence  of  a  Clin- 
tonian senator,  that  he  had  reason  to  believe  the  council 
of  revision  would  reject  the  bill  in  the  form  it  then  was, 
if  they  could  be  supported  in  the  measure  by  their  friends 


1821.]  or  NEW-YORK.  561 

in  the  legislature.  In  justice  to  that  senator,  I  must  be 
allowed  to  add,  that  he  told  the  member  that  whatever 
others  might  do,  he  would  not  consent  to  resist  the  bill  as 
amended  ;  that  he  had  for  many  years  been  in  favor  of  a 
revision  of  the  constitution  ;  that  the  proposed  bill  was,  in 
his  judgment,  as  unobjectionable  as  any  bill  which  could 
be  devised  that  would  pass  both  houses,  and  if  it  should 
be  rejected  by  the  council,  he  should  still  vote  for  it, 
and  make  what  efforts  he  could,  to  obtain  two-thirds  of 
the  legislature  in  its  favor.  If  the  project  I  have  men- 
tioned, was  one  seriously  entertained  by  the  majority 
of  the  council,  of  which  I  have  no  other  evidence  than 
what  I  have  stated,  it  was  abandoned  ;  for  it  finally  passed 
that  body  without  opposition. 

During  the  present  session  it  became  necessary  to  elect 
a  senator  of  the  United  States,  in  place  of  Mr.  Sanford, 
whose  term  expired  on  the  fourth  of  March.  Mr.  San- 
ford was  a  candidate  for  re-election  ;  but  at  a  caucus  of 
republican  members  of  the  legislature,  which  was  attended 
by  eighty-two  members,  Mr.  Van  Buren  received  fifty- 
eight  votes,  and  Mr.  Sanford  but  twenty-four.  Mr.  Van 
Buren  was,  of  course,  declared  regularly  nominated.  This 
enterprising  and  ambitious  man,  having  for  several  years 
constituted  the  active  and  moving  spirit  of  his  party  in 
New-York,  began  now  to  turn  his  attention  to  the  general 
government.  Washington  presented  to  his  restless  and 
active  mind,  a  far  more  extended  theatre  of  action  than 
Albany.  The  way  wasopen,  and  the  time  was  propitious 
for  him  to  take  the  field  there,  with  a  fair  prospect  of 
being  the  great  man  of  the  Empire  State. 

As  a  national  politician  there  was  no  reason  to  appre- 
hend that  Mr.  Clinton  would  be  sustained  by  a  majority 
of  the  people  of  New-York  ;  and  the  pecuniary  embarrass- 
ments of  Gov.  Tompkins,  his  impaired  health,  his  failure 

in  the  recent  election  in  this  state,  and  his  irregular  habits, 

.^6 


562  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

rendered  It  morally  certain  that  he  would  retire  from 
public  life  after  the  term  for  which  he  had  been  elected 
vice-president  should  expire.  Who,  then,  could  stand  in 
the  way  of  Mr.  Van  Buren  from  his  own  state  1  It  is  not 
improbable  that  he,  at  that  early  period,  anticipated  the 
splendid  success  which  subsequently  attended  his  career 
as  a  national  politician. 

The  Clintonians,  in  the  legislature,  voted  for  Mr.  San- 
ford.  In  this,  I  ihen  thought,  and  now  ihink,  they  were 
wrong.  It  was  not  pretemled  that  Mr.  Sanford's  political 
principles  varied  essentially  from  Mr.  Van  Euren's  ;  nor 
was  it  claimed  for  him,  that  he  was  personally,  a  man  of 
more  integrity,  while  all  admitted  that  Mr.  Van  Euren 
possessed  a  higher  grade  of  talent.  What,  then,  was  to 
be  gained  by  voting  for  Mr.  Sanford  ?  I  refused  to  do  so; 
but  as  my  political  friends  all  made  a  point  of  supporting 
Mr.  S.,  under  an  apprehension  that  my  vote  for  Mr.  Van 
Buren  would  be  regarded  as  an  abandonment  of  them, 
which  I  had  no  intention  of  doing,  I  did  not  vote  at  all  on 
the  question. 

In  the  senate,  Mr.  Van  Buren  received  seventeen  votes, 
and  Mr.  Sanford  eight  ;  and  in  the  assembly,  the  vote 
stood  sixty-nine  for  Mr.  Van  Buren,  and  fifty-two  for  Mr. 
Sanford. 

Mr.  Benjamin  Knower,  of  Albany,  was  this  winter  ap- 
pointed by  the  legislature,  treasurer,  in  lieu  of  Mr.  Ger- 
rit  L.  Dox. 

Mr.  Dox  was  considered  a  little  unstable  and  wavering 
in  his  politics,  while  ]\Tr.  Knower  was  a  decided  and  ex- 
tremely active  and  influential  politician,  which  probably 
was  the  principal  reason  of  the  change.  There  were, 
however,  other  and  better  reasons.  Mr.  Knower  had  been 
brought  up  an  apprentice  to  the  hatting  business,  in  Mas- 
sachusetts, and  while  he  was  yet  a  young  man  had  estab- 
lished himself  in   Albany  as  a  hatter.     Bv  his  industry 


1821.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  663 

and  personal  labor,  he  had  acquired  considerable  wealth, 
and  by  his  integrity  and  fair  dealing,  had  gained  the  confi- 
dence of  all  who  knew  him.  He  was  one  of  nature's 
great  men,  and  an  honorable  specimen  of  what  a  laboring 
American  mechanic,  favored  with  vigorous  intellectual 
powers,  may  become.  Though  zealous  in  his  political 
principles,  he  was  frank,  candid,  and  liberal  ;  and,  though 
an  ardent  partisan,  he  was  kind  and  benevolent. 

The  successful  prosecution  of  the  construction,  and  early 
completion  of  the  canals,  required  the  appointment  of  an 
other  acting  commissioner  j  and  provisions  for  that  pur- 
pose were  accordingly  made  by  the  legislature. 

The  office  of  canal  commissioner  had  now  become  a 
great  state  office.  Much  depended  on  the  ability  and 
fidelity  with  which  these  officers  discharged  their  duty; 
and  the  immense  amount  of  monies  which  passed  through 
their  hands,  and  was  expended  under  their  direction, 
clothed  them  with  a  patronage  which  put  it  in  their  pouer 
to  exercise  a  great  political  influence,  especially  in  those 
parts  of  the  state  where  the  canals  were  located. 

When  it  was  determined  that  an  additional  commis- 
sioner should  be  created,  a  number  of  respectable  and 
powerful  candidates  for  the  appointment,  from  the  valley 
of  the  Mohawk  and  other  parts  of  the  state,  were  an- 
nounced ;  and  among  the  most  pressing,  were  Gerrit  L. 
Dox,  the  late  treasurer,  and  Moses  Austin,  the  senator 
from  Greene  county.  But  several  of  the  central  and  inte- 
rior counties  in  the  state,  and  such  were  Schoharie,  Otsego, 
and  Delaware,  claimed  a  right  to  be  represented  in  the 
canal  board — a  board  which  had  now  become  one  of  pri- 
mary importance — and  they,  with  great  unanimity,  irre- 
spective of  party  considerations,  recommended  William 
C.  BoucK,  a  senator  from  the  county  of  Schoharie.  He 
was,  however,  afterwards  regularly  nominated  at  a  demo- 
cratic legislative  caucus,  and  subsequently  appointed  by 


564  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

nearly  the  unanimous  nomination  of  both  houses  of  the 
legislature.  In  the  senate,  the  vote  for  him  was  quite 
unanimous,  with  the  exception  of  Mr.  Rosecrantz,  a  respect- 
able and  worthy  senator,  of  German  descent,  from  Herki- 
mer county,  who,  with  true  Dutch  obstinacy,  declared  he 
would  ^^  never  vote  for  a  hucktaiiy 

Mr.  Bouck  was  a  self-made  man  ;  but  his  native  saga- 
city and  shrewdness,  his  great  caution  and  prudence,  and 
his  almost  intuitive  knowledge  of  men,  had  already  given 
him  an  influence  among  his  political  friends  in  the  quarter 
of  the  state  in  which  he  resided,  for  which  those  who  were 
not  intimately  acquainted  with  him,  or  were  not  good 
judges  of  the  human  character,  knew  not  how  to  account. 
Van  Buren,  however,  early  knew,  and  properly  appreci- 
ated him. 

The  selection  of  Mr.  Bouck  was  exceedingly  judicious. 
Far  from  disappointing,  he  exceeded  the  anticipations  of 
his  friends.  The  history  of  our  canals  will  show  that  he 
rendered  services  to  the  state  of  a  charcter  highly  impor- 
tant. 

The  joint  committee  on  the  Green  Bag  Message,  on  the 
15th  of  March,  made  their  report.  They  produced  several 
affidavits  impeaching  the  depositions  which  accompanied 
the  governor's  communication  ;  and,  in  their  report,  they 
speak  with  great  asperity  of  the  course  taken  by  the  go- 
vernor, and  conclude  by  alleging  that  the  existence  of  any 
extraneous  influence  has  never  been  observed  in  any  of 
our  elections.  It  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  honorable 
men  could  bring  themselves  to  make  such  a  declaration  in 
the  face  of  an  intelligent  community,  nine-tenths  of  whom 
must  have  Leen  satisfied  that  it  was  incorrect. 

The  governor,  in  his  Green  Bag  Message,  had  reminded 
the  legislature  of  the  resolution  passed  by  the  two  houses 
in  1790,  that  it  was  improper,  for  a  person  holding  an 
office  under  the  government  of  the  United  States,  to  be  a 


1821.]  OF   NEW-YORK.  565 

member  of  the  state  legislature.  This  resolution  the 
joint  committee  repudiate  in  no  measured  terms  j  and  yet, 
a  few  months  afterwards,  the  delegates  of  the  convention, 
and  the  people  of  the  state,  incorporated  the  substance  of 
that  resolution  into  our  constitution, — so  highly  did  they 
approve  of  the  principle  involved  in  it. 

The    legislature    adjourned    in  the  latter   part  of   the 
month  of  March. 

For  the  purpose  of  giving,  in  a  connected  form,  the 
proceedings  of  the  legislature,  I  have  omitted  to  notice  the 
action  of  the  new  council  of  appointment,  which,  it  will 
be  recollected,  consisted  of  Waiter  Bowne  from  the  south- 
ern district,  John  T.  Moore  from  the  middle,  Roger  Skin 
ner  from  the  eastern,  and  David  E.  Evans  from  the  west- 
ern. They  were  all  decidedly  hostile  to  the  governor, 
and  Mr.  Skinner  was  said  to  be,  not  only  politically,  but 
personally  unfriendly  to  him.  From  the  standing  of 
Judge  Skinner,  and  from  his  activity  in  all  party  opera- 
tions, he  was  supposed  to  be  the  efficient  man  in  the 
council,  and  from  that  circumstance  it  acquired  the  name 
of  Skinner's  Council.  Judge  Skinner,  from  his  conduct 
in  this  body,  and  perhaps  from  other  parts  of  his  political 
conduct,  was  supposed  to  be  naturally  vindictive  and  ma- 
lignant in  his  feelings.  It  may  be  so,  but  I  have  before 
remarked  that  from  the  observations  I  made  in  the  course 
of  my  acquaintance  with  him,  my  impressions  in  relation 
to  his  character,  and  the  native  propensities  of  his  mind, 
were  not  in  accordance  with  such  a  supposition.  He  was 
not,  it  is  true,  a  great  man  ;  but  I  think  he  possessed  kind- 
ly and  social  feelings.  He  had  been  educated  in  a  school 
of  politics  which  taught  him  to  believe  that  every  legal 
measure  ought  to  be  taken  to  diminish  the  power  of  an 
opponent,  and  that  to  the  "  victors  belonged  the  spoils." 
This  maxim,  which  has  been  so  much  the  subject  of  ani- 
madversion, and  has  been  for  many  years  denounced  by 


566  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

all  parties  in  the  state  when  in  the  minority,  has  been 
pracliced  by  each  and  every  party  when  in  the  majority. 
I  do  not  affirm  that  the  practice  has  been  right,  but  I  state 
as  a  historical  fact,  that  such  has  been  the  practice.  It  is 
true,  Mr.  Skinner's  Council  carried  out  this  system  with 
greater  rigor  than  even  here  we  had  been  accustomed  to. 
But  in  fact,  the  war  was  about  men,  and  not  about  mea- 
sures, and  perhaps  on  that  very  account  the  feelings  of  the 
party  in  power  were  more  highly  excited.  Mr.  Skinner 
was  attacked  with  great  severity  by  the  Clintonian  news- 
paper writers ;  and  I  have  no  doubt  his  feelings  were 
much  soured  j  but  from  a  long  and  intimate  acquaintance 
with  him,  he  has  left  no  other  impression  on  my  mind  than 
that  of  a  kind  hearted,  friendly  and  companionable  man. 
He  has  many  years  ago,  gone  down  to  the  grave,  and  has 
not  to  my  knowledge,  left  a  single  relative  in  the  state  of 
New-York,  and  I  feel  for  that  reason  a  higher  obligation 
upon  me  to  do  justice  to  his  character  and  memory. 

The  council  met  on  the  12th  of  January,  and  on  the  first 
day  of  their  meeting  they  ordered  the  issuing  of  eleven  writs 
of  svpersedeas  to  as  many  sheriffs  of  counties.  They  re- 
moved Archibald  Mclntyre  from  the  office  of  comptrol- 
ler. The  comptroller,  since  Mr.  Mclntyre  had  been  the 
incumbent  of  the  office,  had  been  considered  rather  as  a 
working  man  than  as  a  politician.  Neither  the  council  of 
1807,  1810,  1813,  nor  18M,  although  Mr.  Mclntyre  was 
decidedly  hostile  to  them,  had  manifested  the  least  dispo- 
sition to  remove  him.  They  were  aware  that  it  required 
time  and  experience  to  become  well  acquainted  with  the 
financial  concerns  of  this  great  state,  and  with  the  best 
and  most  proper  mode  of  managing  them  j  and  they  treat- 
ed Mr.  Mclntyre  as  before  stated,  rather  as  a  laborer  em- 
ployed by  the  state  than  as  a  political  office  holder.  Be- 
sides, all  men  admitted  that  he  was  an  accurate  and  able 
accountant,  and  an  honest  man.     His  removal  produced 


1821.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  567 

great  excitement  and  its  effect  upon  community  would  have 
been  greater  had  not  the  council  made  a  judicious  selec- 
tion of  a  successor.  That  successor  was  John  Savage, 
the  son  of  the  venerated  senator  Edward  Savage,  and  late 
chief  justice  of  this  state.  Mr.  Savage  was  a  modest,  re- 
tiring man,  but  all  who  were  acquainted  with  him  knew  him 
to  be  a  person  of  sterling  good  sense,  strict  and  rigid  in- 
tegrity, amiable  in  his  disposition  and  unblemished  in  his 
morals  and  character. 

The  council  also,  on  the  same  day,  removed  Thomas  J. 
Oakley  from  the  office  of  attorney-general.  This  was 
anticipated.  Samuel  A.  Talcott,  then  a  young  lawyer, 
who  resided  in  Utica,  was  appointed  in  his  place.  Mr. 
Talcott  had  not  then  acquired  much  eminence  at  the  bar, 
but  he  soon  developed  talents  in  his  profession  of  the 
highest  order.  This  appointment  was  considered  as  pecu- 
liarly Mr.  Van  Buren's;  and  the  amiable  traits  in  Mr. 
T's  character  and  his  splendid  legal  talents  fully  justified 
Mr.  Van  Buren  in  taking  a  warm  interest  in  his  favor. 
Mr.  Talcott  had  been  a  federalist,  but  with  many  others 
of  that  party  had  opposed  the  election  of  Mr.  Clinton  ; 
and  Mr.  Van  Buren,  no  doubt  felt,  that  good  policy  re- 
quired that  some  distinguished  mark  of  attention  and 
respect  should  be  bestowed  on  some  of  the  individuals 
who  had  been  ranked  among  the  federalists.  Mr.  Tal- 
cott too,  was  a  young  man,  and  it  was  said  to  be  a  part 
of  Mr.  Van  Buren's  policy  to  appear  as  the  patron  of 
young  men  whose  abilities  and  situation  in  life  afforded  a 
promise  that  they  would  become  influential  in  society.  I 
recollect  that  Judge  Piatt,  about  that  time,  in  speaking  to 
me  about  this  and  some  other  similar  appointment,  said, 
with  a  very  significant  look,  "  This  is  the  age  of  young 
men."  Generally  speaking,  I  do  not  think  political  lead- 
ers are  sufficiently  aware  of  the  importance  of  enlisting 
young  men  in  their  cause.     The  young  have  ardor,  enter- 


568  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

prise  and  vigor,  and  the  prospect  of  a  long  life  before 
them.  They  too,  are  less  suspicious  and  less  selfish  than 
their  seniors. 

The  council  did  not  confine  their  operation,  even  on  the 
first  day  of  their  meeting,  to  the  removal  of  civil  officers, 
but  superseded  several  gentlemen  holding  military  com- 
missions. Heretofore,  this  class  of  office  holders,  in  con- 
sequence of  the  unproductiveness  of  their  offices,  had, 
during  all  the  political  revolutions,  remained  undisturbed. 
General  Anthony  Lamb,  the  commissary-general,  was  re- 
moved to  make  place  for  Alexander  M.  Muir,  and  Gillead 
Sperry,  a  colonel  of  a  regiment  of  calvary  in  Clinton 
county,  was  also  removed.  No  allegation  of  misconduct 
appears  to  have  been  made  against  either  Gen.  Lamb  or 
Col.  Sperry. I  But  the  removal  which  produced  the  great- 
est excitement,  was  that  of  Solomon  Van  Rensselaer  from 
the  office  of  adjutant-general.  The  gallantry  of  General 
Van  Rensselaer  as  a  soldier,  is  well  known  and  univer- 
sally admitted.  The  military  services  he  had  before  that 
time  rendered  to  the  nation,  constitute  a  part  of  its 
history.  During  the  late  war,  though  a  federalist,  he  had 
volunteered  his  services  on  the  Niagara  frontier,  and  in 
a  daring,  though  ill-advised  attack,  led  by  him,  upon  the 
British  at  Queenstown,  he  had  been  dangerously  wounded. 
Notwithstanding  all  these  circumstances,  and  notwithstand- 
ing he  had  been  retained  in  office  by  Governor  Tompkins, 
although  an  open  political  opponent  during  the  whole 
period  he  administered  the  government,  the  present  coun- 
cil, without  any  charge  of  official  misconduct,  removed 
him.  William  L.  Marcy,  the  late  governor,  was  appointed 
in  his  place.  Stephen  Allen  was  appointed  mayor  of 
New-York,  in  lieu  of  Cadwallader  D.  Golden,  and  Peter 
A.  was  removed  from  the  office  of  recorder,  to  which 
Richard  Riker  was  appointed.* 

*  The  governor  refused  to  sign  the  minutes  of  the  proceedings  of  the  council. 
t  Sea  Note  G 


1821.]  OF    NEW-YORK.  569 

After  making  these  changes  in  the  great  officers  of  the 
state,  the  council  proceeded  into  every  county  and  re- 
moved all,  or  nearly  all  the  sheriffs,  clerks,  surrogates, 
judges  of  the  courts  of  common  pleas,  and  justices  of  the 
peace,  who  were  known  or  suspected  to  be  politically 
opposed  to  them. 

Although  this  council  may  seem  to  us  extremely  rigor- 
ous, it  must  be  confessed  they  were  rather  carrying  out 
the  principle  imbibed,  and  the  practices  tolerated  under 
the  old  constitution,  than  striking  out  a  new  path  for 
themselves.  Mr.  Skinner  and  his  colleagues  were  play- 
ing the  same  game  in  respect  to  Gov.  Clinton,  which  he 
had  done  when  himself  a  member  of  the  council,  with 
respect  to  Gov.  Lewis,  and  when  on  the  motion  of  Mr. 
Clinton,  Maturin  Livingston,  the  brother-in-law  of  Lewis, 
was  removed  from  the  office  of  recorder  of  New-York, 
and  Dr.  Tillotson,  another  near  connection  and  personal 
friend  of  Gov.  Lewis,  was  removed  from  the  office  of 
secretary  of  state. 

But  there  is  one  act  of  this  council,  which,  in  my  judg- 
ment, admits  of  no  reasonable  apology.  The  act  to  which 
I  refer,  was  the  removal  of  Gideon  Hawley  from  the 
office  of  superintendent  of  common  schools.  Mr.  Haw- 
ley had  by  great  skill  and  labor  formed  our  common 
school  system.  All  who  know  him,  and  he  is  now,  and 
was  then  generally  known,  admit  not  only  his  fitness,  but 
his  peculiar  fitness  for  that  office.  On  the  able  and  faith- 
ful discharge  of  his  duties  depended,  not  the  temporary 
success  of  this  or  that  party,  but  in  a  considerable  degree 
the  weal  or  woe  of  the  rising  generation.  The  council 
removed  him  and  appointed  in  his  place  Welcome  Esleeck, 
Esq.,  a  mere  collecting  attorney,  who  had  scarce  any  of 
the  requisite  qualifications  of  a  superintendent  of  schools. 
So  gross  was  this  outrage,  that  the  political  friends  of  the 
council  in  the  legislature,  would  not  submit  to  it.     Gen, 


570  POLITICAL    HISTORY  [1821. 

Root  soon  after  the  appointment  of  Mr.  Esleeck  for,  as 
was  well  understood,  the  mere  purpose  of  getting  rid  of 
him,  introduced  a  bill,  or  attached  a  clause  to  some  bill 
on  its  passage  in  the  assembly,  enacting  that  the  secreta- 
ry of  state  should, ex-officio,  be  the  superintendent  of  com- 
mon schools,  which  soon  passed  through  both  houses  with 
acclamation.  Mr.  John  Van  Ness  Yates,  a  man  of  great 
versatility  of  talent,  was  then  secretary.  Both  he  and  his 
successors  have  performed  well  and  faithfully  their  duties 
as  superintendent  of  schools.  There  is,  however,  one 
objection  to  Gen.  Root's  law.  The  secretary  of  state  is 
necessarily  a  politician  ;  but  the  man  who  presides  over 
our  system  of  popular  education  should  be  entirely  detached 
from  all  political  parties.  It  is  the  improvement  of  the 
mind  and  morals  of  children,  and  not  the  promotion  of 
the  success  of  a  party,  which  should  call  into  action  all 
his  energies,  and  to  which  all  his  efforts  should  be  di- 
rected. 

Soon  after  the  removal  of  Mr.  Mclntyre,  the  Clinto- 
nians  nominated  him  as  their  candidate  for  a  state  sena- 
tor from  the  middle  district.  The  candidate,  regularly, 
should  have  been  taken  from  the  county  of  Otsego,  but 
the  Clintonians  of  that  county  feeling  indignant  at  Mr. 
Mclntyre's  removal,  cheerfully  gave  up  their  right  to  the 
candidate,  and  he  was  by  his  political  friends  in  the  dis- 
trict supported  with  great  cordiality.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  democratic  party  considering  this,  as  it  really  was,  an 
appeal  to  the  people  from  the  decision  of  the  council,  and 
a  sort  of  trial  by  the  country  whether  his  conduct  in  rela- 
tion to  Gov.  Tompkins  had  been  correct,  exerted  them- 
selves to  defeat  his  election,  with  great  zeal  and  energy. 
The  people  rendered  their  verdict  in  favor  of  Mr,  Mcln- 
tyre ;  a  result  the  more  honorable  to  him,  because  at  the 
preceding  election,  the  bucktail  or  democratic  majority  in 
that  district  was  about  eight  hundred,  and  Mr.  Mclntyre, 


1821.]  or  NEW-YORK,  571 

together  with  his  colleague,  Mr.  Hasbrouck,  was  this  year 
elected  by  a  majority  of  about  four  hundred. 

In  the  assembly  the  democratic  party  elected  sevent}'- 
members,  and  the  Clintonians  fifty-two.  In  the  senate, 
from  the  southern  district,  Abraham  Gurnee  and  Abel 
Huntington  were  elected  ;  in  the  middle,  Archibald  Mc- 
Intyreand  Abraham  Hasbrouck  j  eastern,  David  C.  Judson 
and  Daniel  Shepherd  •  western,  Samuel  M.  Hopkins  and 
Henry  Seymour  were  chosen. 

The  members  elected  from  the  southern  district,  and 
Mr.  Seymour  from  the  western  district,  were  republicans, 
and  the  others  were  Clintonians.  The  majority  of  votes 
in  the  state  for  a  convention,  was  seventy-four  thousand 
four  hundred  and  forty-five  !  ! 

This  overwhelming  majority  is  an  evidence  of  the 
powerful  current  of  public  opinion  in  favor  of  that  mea- 
sure j  and  if  an  able  general  ought  to  foresee  the  result 
of  a  battle,  Mr.  Clinton,  Chief  Justice  Spencer,  Judge  Van 
Ness  and  others,  as  good  politicians,  ought  to  have 
known  that  a  current  was  in  motion  which  it  was  in  vain 
to  resist,  and  which  would  overwhelm  in  ruin  all  who  at- 
tempted to  resist  it. 


(Note  B,  Referred  to  on  Page  335.) 


I  do  not  now  recollect  the  particulars  of  the  altercation  between  Judge  Taylor 
and  Mr.  Purdy.  Of  one  thing  however,  I  am  certain,  that  all  men  at  the  time 
justified  Judge  Taylor  for  committing  this  apparent  act  of  violence.  The  provo- 
cation therefore,  on  the  part  of  his  antagonist,  must  have  been  great.  Judge  Tay- 
lor, though  a  man  of  high  tone  of  feeling,  inflexible  resolution  and  indomitable 
courage;  was  utterly  incapable  of  unjustifiably  assailing  an  adversary. 


(Note  C,  Referred  to  on  Page  389.) 


1  was  mistaken  in  stating  that  no  convention  was  held  in  pursuance  of  the  cir 
cular  referred  to  in  the  text.  I  was  led  into  the  error  by  a  pretty  careful  exami 
nation  of  the  files  of  the  Evening  Post.  Not  finding  in  that  paper  any  account  o 
the  proceedings  of  any  convention  held  in  pursuance  of  the  call,  I  inferred  that 
no  such  convention  was  held.  The  conjecture  expressed  in  the  text,  that  "one 
object  of  the  convention  was  to  take  into  consideration  the  conductof  the  Eastern 
Federalists,"  and  probably  to  deliberate  on  the  question,  whether  the  Federalists 
of  New- York  should  be  represented  in  the  Hartford  Convention,  was  also  entirely 
unfounded.  Col.  Stone,  in  the  Commercial  Advertiser  of  April  15,  I84i2,  says  the 
convention  tras  AeW,  that  he  was  a  member  of  it,  that  its  ''immediate  object 
was  to  consider  Mr.  Van  Buren's  conscription  bill,  then  before  the  Senate,"  and 
that  the  Hartford  Convention  was  not  named  at  that  convention. 


(Note  D,  Referred  to  on  Page  155.) 


Since  the  publication  of  the  first  edition,  I  have  been  informed  that  the  report 
that  Gov.  Jay,  after  his  retirement  from  public  life,  refused  to  read  political  news- 
papers, was  incorrect.  Judge  William  Jay,  in  his  letter  to  me,  after  stating  that 
the  report  was  untrue,  and  that  such  a  lefusal  would  not  have  been  consistent 
with  the  interest  every  good  man  ought  to  take  in  the  welfare  of  his  country, 
says: — "He,"  (Gov.  Jay,)  "  read  the  papers  constantly,  and,  at  times,  took  pa- 
pers of  opposite  politics,  that  he  might  obtain  more  full  information  of  passing 
events.  So,  also,  he  made  it  a  point  of  duty  to  vote  at  every  election."  It  is 
singular  how  the  report  mentioned  in  the  text  obtained  currency.  I  have  heard 
it  asserted  as  truth,  among  well  informed  men,  perhaps  a  hundred  times 


(Note  E,  Referred  to  on  Page  412.) 


The  Bank  of  the  United  States  was  chartered  during  this  session.  The  bill  for 
its  charter  was  reported  by  Mr.  Calhoun,  chairman  of  the  finance  committee.  It 
was  supported  generally  by  the  Republican  members  of  Congress,  and  among  its 
supporters  Clay,  Calhoun,  Forsyth,  Ingham,  Lowndes  and  J.  W.  Taylor  weie  the 


EXPLANITORY    NOTES.  573 

most  influential  and  efficient.  It  was  opposed  by  the  Federalists  as  a  party,  at 
the  head  of  whom  in  the  H.  R.  was  Mr.  Webster.  They  were  joined  by  some  of 
the  southern  and  a  few  other  democratic  members.  By  the  aid  of  these,  Mr 
Webster  entertained  sanguine  hopes  of  resisting  successfully  the  passage  of  the 
bill,  but  his  expectations  were  disappointed  by  a  defection  in  his  own  ranks, 
which  he  did  not  anticipate,  and  which  he  perceived  with  surprise  and  mortifica* 
tion.  Mr.  Grosvenor  from  this  state,  and  Mr.  Hulbcrt  from  Massachusetts,  before 
the  close  of  the  discussion,  declared  themselves  in  favor  of  the  Bank,  and  even- 
tually about  fifteen  other  Federalists  voted  with  them  in  favor  of  the  bill. 

While  the  bill  was  in  committee  of  the  whole  in  the  H.  R.  an  incident  occurred 
which  in  the  history  of  political  parties  deserves  to  be  noticed.  Doct.  Lewie 
Condit,  a  member  from  N.  Jersey,  moved  to  amend  the  bill  by  providing  for  the 
location  of  the  Mother  Bank  in  the  city  of  New- York.  He  was  supported  by  Gov. 
Robertson,  a  member  from  New  Orleans,  by  Mr.  Forsyth  from  Georgia,  and  many 
others  of  the  southern  and  western  members,  and  his  amendment  was  adopted  by 
a  large  majority.  Mr.  Robertson,  Forsyth  and  others  contended  with  great  and 
decisive  effect  that  the  Bank  ought  to  be  located  in  the  Commercial  Metropolis. 
It  will  be  recollected  that  Mr.  Dallas  of  Philadelphia,  was  at  that  time  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury.  The  evening  succeeding  the  day  on  which  Dr.  Condit's  mo- 
tion was  adopted,  Mr.  D.  set  on  foot  a  very  active  system  of  electioneering,  and 
the  next  day  Mr.  Clendenin  from  Ohio,  moved  a  reconsideration  of  the  vote, 
which  motion  was  carried. 

It  was  at  that  period  pretty  well  ascertained,  that  the  bill  for  chartering  the 
Bank  would  not  pass  the  house,  without  the  vote  of  a  large  majority  of  the  re- 
publican members  from  New-York.  Mr.  Taylor,  therefore,  invited  a  meeting  of 
those  members.  Such  a  meeting  or  caucus  was  held,  and  Mr.  T.  proposed  that 
unless  the  friends  of  the  Bank  would  consent  to  rescind  the  vote  upon  Mr.  Clen> 
denin's  motion,  the  New- York  members  should  agree  to  vote  against  the  bill. 
A  m.ajority  at  first  seemed  inclined  to  do  so,  but  Mr.  Irving  from  the  cityof  New- 
York  being  called  ou,  declared  that  he  had  given  his  word  "  to  the  administra- 
tion," as  he  expressed  himself,  to  vote  in  fivor  of  the  Bank,  and  he  should  do  so. 
Upon  this,  Mr.  Taylor  said,  if  the  member  from  the  city,  which  was  most  inter- 
ested in  the  question,  chose  to  relinquish  his  opposition  to  the  location  of  the 
Bank  in  a  rival  city,  he  (Mr.  T.)  coming  as  he  did  from  the  country,  would  not 
assume  the  responsibility  for  the  sake  of  sustaining  the  supposed  interest  of  the 
city,  of  opposing  the  chartering  of  the  Bank,  and  with  him  nearly  all  the  coun- 
try members  concurred.  It  would  therefore  seem,  that  either  the  Bank  would  have 
been  located  in  New-York,  or  no  bank  would  have  been  chartered,  if  Mr.  Irving 
had  not  declared  his  determination  to  vote  for  a  bank,  to  be  stationed  in  Phila- 
delphia. Eventually,  all  the  republican  members  from  this  state,  except  Messrs. 
Girdsall,  Root,  Savage  and  myself   voted  for  the  Bank. 


(Note  F,  Referred  to  on  Page  469.) 


In  the  first  edition  it  is  stated  that  Gen.  Root  was  appointed  by  this  council 
District  Attorney  for  the  county  of  Delaware.  This  is  an  error.  The  fact  was, 
a  majority  of  the  council  ogrccd  to  appoint  Mr.  Root,  which  occasioned  an  im- 
pression upon  my  mind  that  he  had  been  actually  appointed,  and  I  incautiouslf 
■tated  the  fact  without  referring  to  the  minutes  of  the  council. 


574  explanatory  notes. 

(Note  G,  Referred  to  on  Page  568.) 

Tlietoxt  iswron^  as  respects  the  removal  of  Col.  .Speri-y.  He  was  charg-ed 
witli  ollicial  malconduct  as  president  of  a  court  martial.  Information  recently 
receivoii  from  a  wntlenian  who  then  residcjd  at  Plaltsbursrli.  and  was  an  officer 
in  the  militia,  eiiahle.s  me  to  slate,  that  a  brother  of  Col.  S.  at  that  time  was  a  Lieut. 
Col.  of  u  Re;rim(jnt  of  Infantry,  and  that  Maj.  A.  G.  Fla.!;i,'  had  raised  a  uniformed 
hallaliiMi.  Tlic  conifianies  which  composed  Maj.  Fla^r^'s  battallion  consisted 
each  of  100  men.  The  Lieutenant  Colonel  contended  that  Maj.  F.  had  no  right 
to  enli'^t  more  than  64  men  in  one  company,  and  on  that  srround  he  returned  as 
delini|uenl  some  30  or  40  of  Flagg's  men.  On  the  trial  oflhe.se  men  Major  Flagg 
cm|jloyed  Mr.  Wulworth.  the  present  Chancellor,  as  their  counsel.  He  contended 
thaliheoflicersof  the  battalion  under  whose  orders  the  accu.sed  had  acted,  if  there 
had  been  a  delin(picncy,  were  the  delinquents,  and  not  the  privates,  v  ho  inno- 
cently and  in  good  faith  had  at  their  own  expense  equipped  themselves  ;  that 
if  the  officers  had  been  the  accused,  they  must  have  been  tried  by  a  general  court 
martial,  ^^■hich  would  have  been  ordered  by  Maj.  Gen.  Mooers,  in  which  event 
they  would  have  h.id  a  fair  trial;  that  to  evade  an  impartial  investigation,  the 
present  course  had  been  adopted,  and  a  court  had  been  organized  with  a  presi- 
dent, who  was  the  mere  instrument  of  Lieut.  Col.  Sperry,  whose  feelings  were 
strongly  bia-s-sed  against  the  accused.  Mr  Walworih  probably  advocated  the 
causi;  of  his  clients  with  some  warmth,  and  the  president.  Col.  Sperry,  alleging 
that  he  trealcil  the  court  disrespectfully,  commanded  him  to  be  silent ;  but  he 
conliiiuim;  to  advise  his  clients,  the  court  forced  him  to  leave  the  room,  and  sta- 
tioned a  mar.shal  at  the  door  to  prevent  him  from  returning.  These  facts  were 
represented  to  the  Council  of  Appointment,and  on  that  representation  Col.  Sperry 
was  removed. 


Note  H,  Referred  to  on  Page  245. 

Present  information  enables  me  to  say  that  the  imputation  of  sinister  motives 
implied  in  the  text  against  the  venerable  Elclward  Savage  is  unjust.  The  only 
new  appointment,  that  of  Mr.  Crary,  was  induced  by  a  political  necessity  which 
then  existed,  the  history  of  which  would  not  now  be  interesting,  but  which  en- 
tirely exonorates  both  Mr.  Sava^'e  and  Mr.  Crary  froni  the  charge  of  being 
iuHucnced  by  any  other  than  honorable  motives. 


Note  I,  Rrferred  to  on  Page  328. 

Sir>ce  the  publication  of  the  first  edition.  I  have  again  examined  the  pamphlet 
referreil  to  in  page  .329,  on  the  authority  of  which,  the  statement  in  the  text  is 
principally  made.  I  find  that  the  pamphlet  does  not  expressly  state  that  the 
petition  (w  hich  has  been  lost)  contained  a  prayer  for  the  grant  of  the  salt  works; 
but  from  its  tenor  no  reader  can  fail  of  inferring  that  a  lease  of  those  works  was 
one  of  the  main  objects  of  the  Company.  Whether  I  was  induced  to  allege 
that  these  works  were  petitioned  for,  from  reading  the  pamphlet,  or  by  finding 
the  allegation  in  some  cotemporary  newspaper,  I  can  not  now  determine. 

1  make  these  remarks  for  the  purpose  of  stating,  that  it  was  far  from  my  inten- 
tion to  charge  any  ofthe  gentlemen  named  inihe  text  as  petitioners,  with  improper 
motives.  It  is  by  no  means  probable  that  at  that  day  the  low  price  for  which  salt 
■would  eventually  be  manufactured  was  anticipated,  or  the  real  value  ofthe  salt 
springs  appreciated.  The  application  for  a  charter  for  the  State  Bank  was  a 
party  measure,  and  these  gentlemen  signed  the  petition  as  li^aders  of  the  Repub- 
lican party,  and  as  slate  officers.  My  sole  object  for  in.sertiug  ibis  account  in  the 
text  was,  to  atford  an  illustration  ofthe  danger  of  leL'islalive  grants  of  monopo- 
lies ;  and  I  mentioned  the  names  of  Gov.  Taylor.  .ludge  Spencer,  Doci.  Tillotson 
and  Col.  Jenkins,  as  evidence  that  men  of  high  character  for  patriotism  .sometimes 
innocenlly  sign  petitions  for  exclusive  grants,  without  sufficiently  considering' 
the  evils  which  may  result  from  them.  Judge  Spencer  has  recently  denied  (as  l 
think  in  rather  uncourteous  termsj  that  he  had  any  concern  in  asking  for  a  lease 
of  die  salt  springs. 


NOTES  BY  GEN.  ROOT— VOL.  I. 


(Note  J.,  Referred  to  on  Page  4.) 


The  author,  thus  early  in  his  Book,  announces  his  intention  "  to  delineate  in 
detail  the  character,  and  develop  the  motives  of  the  actors  in  the  political  drama, 
and  the  causes  which  impelled  those  actions."  It  was  rather  unfortunate  that  he 
made  the  announcement,  but  much  more  so,  that  he  has  actually  and  extensively 
carried  out  that  intention.  No  man  undertaking  to  give  a  political  history  of 
past,  or  even  of  present  times,  can  judge  correctly  of  the  motives  which  impel 
political  men  to  action.  The  evidence  can  only  be  gathei-ed  from  the  ephemeral 
publications  of  the  day,  and  the  denunciations  and  too  often  calumnious  declara- 
tions of  political  adversaries.  In  such  publications,  nought  but  the  basest  of 
motives  are  ascribed  to  an  adversary  ;  while,  in  his  presence,  or  in  a  deliberative 
assembly,  the  same  defamerswould  concede  to  liim  the  most  honorable  intentions. 
The  political  friend  will  generally  content  himself  with  an  approval  of  the  act, 
without  enquiring  into  the  motives.  Should  the  historian  undertake  to  judge  of 
the  motive  entirely  from  the  act  itself,  he  might  be  led  to  a  wrong  conclusion  by 
his  approval,  or  disapproval,  of  the  same  act.  Such  is  man,  that  he  can  not  entirely 
divest  himself  of  prejudice.  Better,  far  better,  then,  to  invest  himself  with  a 
goodly  share  of  Heaven-born  charity,  and  ascribe  no  evil  intention  to  fellow 
man,  unless  clearly  developed  by  his  actions.  E.  B,. 

The  right  of  the  historian  to  deduce  from  the  actions  of  men,  the  motives  of 
action,  has,  I  believe,  been  generally  accorded  to,  and  exercised  by,  all  writers 
of  history.  But  the  motive  assigned,  is  merely  the  opinion,  or  ra-lher  the  deduc- 
tion, of  the  individual  writer.  The  reader,  after  considering  the  action,  sits  in 
judgment  on  the  historian,  and  judges  of  the  correctness  of  his  inferences.  These 
speculations  on  the  causes  of  the  action  of  men,  constitute  a  part,  and  in  my 
judgment  an  important  part,  of  what  may  be  called  the  philosophy  of  history. 
I  may  have  been,  and  probably  in  some  instances  have  been,  wrong  in  the 
motives  I  have  ascribed,  but  whether  wrong  or  right,  the  reader  must  and  ought 
to  judge.  I  must,  however,  be  permitted  to  add,  that  I  have  not  knowingly,  on 
any  occasion,  been  influenced  by  the  party  publications  of  the  day,  in  ascribing 
motives  to  individuals.  J.  D.  H. 


(Note  K.,  Referred  to  on  Page  33.) 


The  independent  tenure  of  office  of  the  State  .Judiciary  did  not  growontof  the 
aristocratic  bearing  of  wealthy  and  influential  families,  giving  a  higher  tone  and 
current  of  thought,  and  producing  a  diflcrent  state  of  society  from  that  in  gome 


576  EXPLANATORY    NOTES. 

of  our  sister  states.  The  independence  of  the  judiciary  was  a  principle  dear  to 
the  Whigs  from  the  earliest  epoch  of  our  history.  The  higher  Courts  in  England 
were  the  King's  Courts,  and  the  judges  -were  appointed  by  the  Crown,  and  their 
duration  in  office,  as  well  as  their  stipends,  were  dependent  upon  the  royal 
will  and  pleasure.  Their  decisions,  when  royal  prerogative  was  in  question, 
were,  of  course,  very  likely  to  be  swayed  by  the  influence  which  gave 
them  being,  and  sustained  them  in  power.  The  advocates  of  freedom,  and  the 
champions  of  the  people's  rights,  were  the  fated  victims.  Their  liberties,  and 
frequently  their  lives,  were  the  sacrifice  upon  the  unholy  altar  of  judicial 
dependence  and  corruption.  Long  they  struggled  to  make  the  judiciary 
independent  of  the  crown.  Eventually  they  were  successful,  and  the  King 
was  compelled  to  issue  his  commissions  to  them  daring  good  behaviour — "  dum 
bene  sese  gesenerit." — On  the  completion  of  the  revolution  (in  1688)  by  the 
installation  of  a  whig  King,  this  right  and  immunity  was  secured  to  them  forever. 
In  our  revolution,  when  the  people  became  the  sovereign,  and  assumed  the 
place  of  majesty  in  all  judicial  proceedings,  the  same  judicial  independence  wa« 
preserved.  The  whigs  in  this  country,  as  well  as  in  England,  have  been  uni- 
form in  this  respect.  E.  R. 

The  learned  author  of  this  note  is  undoubtedly  correct  in  ascribing  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  judiciary  in  England  to  the  well  founded  apprehension  of  the 
whigs,  that  the  dependence  of  the  Judges  for  the  tenure  of  their  offices  upon  the 
King  might  effect  their  decisions  on  questions  in  which  the  royal  prerogative 
was  concerned.  But  is  there  the  same  reason  to  apprehend  that  in  thiscouutrj-, 
where  "  the  people  have  assumed  the  place  of  majesty,"  that  they,  speaking 
through  the  po!ls  of  the  election,  will  encroach  on  the  rights  of  individuals,  or 
on  their  own  rights  as  a  body,  by  an  influence,  growing  out  of  a  power  to 
create  or    remove,  through   their  agents,  the  highest  judicial  functionaries? 

J.  D.  H. 


(Note  L.,  Referred  to  on  Page  37.) 


The  constitution  of  1777  had  provided  that  such  parts  of  the  statute  law  of 
England  and  Great  Britain  as  were  in  force  at  the  beginning  of  the  Revolution, 
should  continue  to  be  the  law,  subject  to  the  action  of  the  Legislature.  The 
statute  of  jeofails,  as  well  as  many  other  amendments  to  the  practice  of  the 
law  and  pleadings,  was  in  force.  The  Legislature  had  provided  for  the 
revision  of  the  laws,  and  appointed  Samuel  Jones  and  Richard  Varick  re- 
visors.  In  1788  the  revised  statutes  were  re-enacted,  and  went  in  force  on  the 
first  of  May  in  that  year,  when  all  the  statutes  of  England  and  Great  Britain, 
and  of  the  late  colony  of  New  York,  ceased  to  be  in  force.  Instead  of  this 
important  statute  being  "drawn  by  Samuel  Jones,"  and  "  its  pas.sage  effected 
by  his  address,  talents  and  influence,"  he  was  but  a  mere  copyist  of  old  statutes, 
throwing  and  condensing  them  into  one  act.  The  revisors,  and  especially  Mr. 
Jones  were  sedulously  careful  to  retain  the  exact  words  and  phraseology  of  all 


EXPLANATORY    NOTES,  577 

the  old  statutes,  however  qnaint  the  expression  or  obsolete  the  tenns.  The 
.'reason  given  for  tlie  retention  was,  that  we  had  the  benefit  of  a  long  coarse  of 
judicial  decisions  to  settle  their  true  meaning  and  construction,  which  would 
be  entirely  lost  by  the  least  variation.  These  expressiona  were  very 
much  altered  in  subsequent  revisions,  and  I  have  not  been  advised  that  the 
public  has  materially  suffered  for  want  of  those  judicial  decisions.  Mr.  Jones 
was  an  able  lawyer,  but  his  eminence  was  not  derived  from  the  exercise  of  his 
talents  in  effecting  the  passage  of  the  revised  statutes  of  1788.  E.  R. 


(Note  M.,  Referked  to  on  Page  48.) 


"  The  most  objectionable  part  of  Gen.  Hamilton's  scheme  was  the  assumption 
by  the  nation  of  the  debts  of  the  respective  states,  and  the  chartering  of  a  Bank 
To  these  measures  the  republicans  of  this  state  were  generally  opposed." — This 
assertion  of  the  author  is  partly  correct  and  partly  incorrect.  The  republicans 
of  this  state  were  generally,  I  believe,  opposed  to  the  assumption  of  the  state 
debts.  We  had  then  six  members  of  the  House  of  Representatives — three 
federalists  and  three  republicans.  The  republican  members  voted  against 
the  assumption.  This  state  had  paid  its  troops  better,  and  defrayed  the  expense 
of  the  war  within  its  borders  in  a  better  currency,  than  those  of  most  of  the  other 
states.  During  the  war  many  of  the  state  troops  were  raised  by  classes,  and 
well  paid.  After  its  close,  the  regiments  and  corps  raised  as  its  quota,  and  put 
upon  the  continental  establishment,  were  liberally  rewarded  in  the  grant  of 
large  quantities  of  valuable  land.  In  the  sale  of  its  unsettled  lands,  the  state 
had  the  means  of  payment  within  itself.  It  had  then  lately,  and  before  the 
ratification  of  the  constitution  by  nine  states,  issued  a  large  emission  of  state 
currency,  which  was  as  good  as  gold  and  silver.  In  addition  to  these  reasons, 
the  republicanshad  not  been  zealous  to  consolidate  the  Union,  and  decorate  it  with 
all  the  trappings  of  a  .great  nation.  They  were  for  presei-ving  the  importance 
of  state  authority  and  state  rights.  In  short,  tlie  republicans  were  opposed  to 
the  accumulation  of  a  large  national  debt,  while  Mr.  Hamilton  declared  it  a 
national  blessing. 

The  Bank  had  the  unanimous  vote  of  this  state  in  Congress."  The  division 
on  that  question  appeared  to  be  rather  geographical  than  political.  The  eastern 
and  commercial  states  were  generally  in  its  favCr,  while  the  southern  and 
planting  states,  with  the  exception  of  their  commercial  towns,  were  in  opposi- 
tion. The  former  saw  the  necessity  of  a  national  currency,  equally  good  in  every 
state,  and  were  convinced  tliat  a  national  Bank  was  the  best  calculated  to  effect 
that  object,  while  the  latter,  not  having  by  experience  been  made  so  well 
acquainted  with  the  laws  of  currency  and  exchanges,  could  see  no  necessity  for 
such  an  institution.    Hence  some  of  their  most  eminent  statesmen,  among  whom 


'  I  learned  the  supposed  fact  that  three  of  the  members  from  this  state  voted 
against  the  incorporation  of  the  first  U.  S.  Bank,  from  an  old  newspaper.  It 
WB.S  probably  incorrect.  J.  D_  jj_ 

37 


578  EYPLANATORY    NOTES. 

Mr.  Jefferson  and  Mr.  Madison  held  a  conspicuous  rank,  could  see  no  authority 
in  the  Constitution  to  create  one. 

There  is  no  definite  specific  grant  of  the  power  ;  and  to  derive  it  from  the 
clause  which  empowers  congress  to  make  all  laws  which  shall  be  necessary  and 
proper  for  carrying  into  execution  the  aforementioned  powers,  it  mast  be  made 
to  appear  that  a  national  bank  was  a  necessary  and  proper  instrument  to  carry 
out,  at  least,  some  of  those  powers.  To  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  imports, 
and  excises,  and  make  them  unifomi  throughout  the  United  States; — to  borrow 
money  on  the  credit  of  the  United  States  ; — to  regulate  commerce  with  foreign 
nations,  and  among  the  several  states, — and  to  regulate  the  value  of  money — re- 
quired of  congress  to  provide  a  national  currency,  sound  and  uniform  in  all  parts 
of  the  United  States.  To  pay  the  debts,  to  support  armies,  and  to  maintain  a 
navy,  congress  are  bound  to  provide  a  safe  depository  of  the  public  moneys,  and 
the  safest  and  cheapest  mode  of  disbursing  and  transmitting  them  to  any  part  of 
the  United  States.  Southern  planters  had  not  yet  di.scovered  that  a  national 
bank  was  necessary  and  proper  for  the  due  execution  of  all  or  any  of  these  powers. 
The  eastern  members  of  congress,  and  those  from  commercial  towns,  were  better 
acquainted  with  the  laws  of  currency  and  exchange.  They  knew  from  experi- 
ence that  exchanges  to  a  large  amount  must  be  made  in  a  paper  medium,  and 
the  evils  of  depreciated  state  currencies  were  fresh  upon  the  memory.  The 
hazard  and  expense  of  transmitting  funds  to  distant  parts  of  the  United  States 
were  known  to  them.  They  perceived  that  a  national  bank  was  a  cure,  and  the 
only  cure  for  these  evils.  That  it  would  furnish  a  paper  medium  of  exchange, 
sound,  and  of  equal  value  in  all  parts  of  the  United  states  : — that  it  would  be  a 
safe  depository  of  the  public  monies,  and  would  transmit  the  funds  safely  and 
free  of  expense  to  any  part  of  the  United  States.  They  might  have  added,  that 
the  bank  could  be  made  to  keep  the  public  money  free  from  executive  control 
till  duly  appropriated  according  to  law.  Had  they  then  believed  that  the  Presi- 
dent had  the  pov^-er  under  the  constitution  to  require  any  officer  of  the  treasury 
to  open  its  doors  and  disburse  its  treasures  at  his  will,  and  in  ca.se  of  disobedience 
to  remove  him  from  office,  and  appoint  one  in  his  stead  who  would  be  ready  to 
obey  his  commands  ; — and  had  they  imagined  that  any  future  one  could  be  found 
daring  enough  to  make  such  requirement,  I  have  no  doubt  it  would  have  been 
urged  as  a  prominent  reason  in  favor  of  the  bank.  But  without  this  there  were 
sutRcient  reasons  to  induce  all  the  republican  members  from  this  state,  from  all 
New  England  and  from  New  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania,  to  vote  for  the  bill,  and 
for  Washington  to  approve. 

When  the  charter  of  the  bank  was  about  to  expire,  and  the  question  of  its  re- 
newal began  to  agitate  the  public  mind,  tliis  country  was  in  the  midst  of  its  diffi- 
culties, which  resulted  in  war.  Great  Britain  had  vexed  us  by  the  impressment 
of  our  seamen,  and  by  her  orders  in  council  blockading  all  the  northern  coast  of 
continental  Europe.  France,  too,  under  the  pretence  of  retaliating  the  British 
orders  in  council,  visited  our  commerce  with  the  destructive  influence  of  her 
Berlin  and  Milan  decrees.  The  federalists,  although  they  did  not  undertake 
entirely  to  exculpate,  evidently  took  sides  with  Great  Britain,  as  against  France 
if  not  their  own  country.  They  cast  the  heaviest  censure  upon  France,  and  weta 
opposed  to  a  war  w  ith  Great  Britain.  The  republicans,  on  the  other  hand, threw 
the  greatest  blame  upon  Great  Britain,  as  having  led  the  way  in  depredation. 
At  this  time  a  large  portion  of  the  stock  of  the  bank  of  the  United  States  wa* 


EXPLANTAORY     NOTES.  579 

owned  in  Enclani^.  It  was  not  originally  subscribed  by  Englishmen,  but  had 
been  remitted  there  in  payment  of  debts.  The  prejudice  of  the  republicans 
was  very  strong  against  Great  Britain,  and  every  thing  British  or  in  any  wise 
connected  with  her.  The  bank  was  called  a  British  bank,  and  its  supposed 
influence  in  this  country  was  dreaded.  A  majority  of  its  directors  were  federal- 
ists, and  this  circumstance,  added  to  their  British  predilections,  induced  the 
whole  federal  party  to  favor  its  re-charter.  Under  such  circumstances  it  is  not 
wonderful  that  the  great  mass  of  the  republican  party  were  opposed  to  the 
bank. 

Nought  but  a  sense  of  a  strong  nece«sity  of  a  National  Bank  could  induce  any 
republican  to  give  it  his  support.  I  remember  well  how  often  I  attempted  to 
reason  my  political  friends  into  a  belief  that  a  National  Bank  was  so  necessary 
to  a  sound  currency  and  a  safe  management  of  the  Ti-easury  that  ^ve  ought  not 
to  hazard  the  timely  creation  of  a  new  one.  I  attempted  to  repel  the  notion  of  a 
supposed  British  influence  in  this  country  through  the  English  stockholders.  1 
urged  that  the  influence,  if  any,  would  be  the  other  way — America  operating 
upon  England.  As  the  English  stockholders  could  have  no  agency,  not  even 
remote,  in  the  management  of  the  affairs  of  the  Bank,  they  could  have  none  of 
that  influence  which  the  disposition  of  pecuniary  favors  may  be  supposed  to 
give — but,  on  the  contrary,  the  stockholders,  deriving  their  income  from  funds 
managed  by  American  Directors,  liable  to  sequestration  by  the  American 
gevernment,  dependent  as  to  its  amount  in  a  great  measure  upon  the  peaceful 
and  prosperous  condition  of  this  country,  and  in  the  event  of  a  war  its  receipt 
entirely  cut  ort',  at  least  for  a  lime,  would  have  every  inducement  which  interest 
can  prompt  to  influence  their  government  to  forbear.  All  this  reasoning  was  of 
no  avail  with  the  republicans  of  Otsego  and  Delaware.  With  them  it  was  a 
Federal  Bank,  a  British  bank,  which  wou'd  keep  us  under  Federal  and  British 
influence.  They  were  my  constituents,  for  I  was  their  Representative  in  Con- 
gress. I  was  unwilling  to  displease  my  constituents,  and  therefore  stepped 
aside  when  the  vote  was  taken  on  re-chartering  the  Bank.  I  fled  the  question — 
a  trick  1  have  seldom  performed,  and  of  which  I  never  was  proud.  E.  E-. 


(Note  N.,  Referred  to  on  Page  83.) 


The  act  requinng  ih->  Town  Inspectors  to  canvass  the  votes  and  return  the 
result  of  their  canvass,  did  not  become  a  law  till  the  winter  of  1790.  I  remember 
it  well.  1  was  a  member  myself.  Joshua  Dewey  of  Otsego  introduced  the 
bill.  I  voted  for  it  cheerfully,  recollecting  with  what  anxiety  we  waited  the 
spring  before,  from  the  last  week  in  April  till  4th  Thursday  in  May,  for  the  can- 
vass. Till  the  canvass  by  the  supervisors,  it  was  extremely  doubtful  whether 
I  was  elected.  I  came  out  but  20  ahead  of  the  highest  of  my  adversaries.  The 
supervisors  gave  me  the  certificate.  The  next  year  the  result  of  the  town 
canvass  was  returned  to  the  County  Clerk — he  made  the  estimate  and  gave  the 
certificate.    I  remember  loo  the  battling  I  had  with  £bcnezer  Foot,  the  County 


5S0  EXPLANATORY    NOTES. 

Clerk  who  declined  for  a  longtime  giving  me  the  certificate,  in  1800,  on  acconnt 
of  an  e  final  being  added  to  my  name  by  one  of  the  towns.  Probably  Mr.  Ham- 
mond was  led  into  the  error  by  finding  on  the  journal  of  that  year,  that  a  bill  for 
that  purpose  was  introduced  into  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  Houses.      E.  B.. 


(Note  O.,  Referred  to  on  Page  127.) 


Judge  Jay  is  in  a  very  great  error  in  saying,  that  "  during  the  six  years  of 
Grov.  Jay's  administration,  not  one  individual  vi^as  dismissed  hy  him  from  office 
on  account  of  his  politics,"  unless  he  would  have  his  readers  believe  that  the 
acts  of  the  Council  under  the  great  Seal  of  the  State  and  the  signature  of  the 
governor  are  not  his  acts.  Judge  Hammond,  too,  has  looked  into  "  the  wrong 
bill"  to  find  the  numerous  dismissals  from  qfficeon  account  of  their  politics,  during 
the  two  last  years  of  Governor  Jay's  power.  "  Removals"  from  office  were 
made  at  that  time  by  issuing  a  new  general  commission  of  the  pleas,  or  of  the 
peace,  or  both,  as  the  occasion  required.  It  was  held  that  a  new  general  com- 
mission to  the  county  superseded  all  the  officers  then  in  commission,*  and  whose 
names  were  not  included  in  the  new.  Under  the  old  constitution,  county  Judges 
(other  than  the  first  Judge)  and  Justices  of  the  Peace  held  during  the  pleasure  of 
the  Council ;  but  new  commissions  were  to  be  issued  once  in  three  years. 
"When,  therefore,  Mr.  Jay's  Council,  and  also  his  successor,  wished  to  make  a 
sweep  in  a  county,  thej^  would  issue  a  new  commission,  when  prehaps  the  old 
one  was  much  less  than  three  years  of  age.  Thus,  in  Delaware,  the  fifst  eom- 
mission  of  the  pleas,  and  also  that  of  the  peace,  V)a.3  issued  the  latter  part  of 
March,  or  beginning  of  April,  1797.  During  the  August  session  of  the  Legis- 
lature in  1798,  a  new  commission  was  issued.  Judge  Gabriel  North  and  assistant 
Justice  Benajah  Beardsley  were  omitted  in  the  new,  and  Tory  Federalists 
appointed  in  their  stead.  In  the  commission  of  the  peace,  myself,  and  I  think 
four  other  Justices  of  the  Peace,  were  omitted,  and  of  course  superseded.  Doct. 
"White,  of  Cherry  Valley,  was  in  the  Council.  He  knew  me  well.  He  must 
have  known  Judge  Nortli.  ButEbenezer  Foote  was  then  in  the  senate,  and  the 
deed  was  undoubtedly  done  at  his  instance,  and  probably  backed  by  Mr. 
Butler,  then  my  colleague  in  the  assembly.  Mr.  L'Hommedieu,  then  a  member 
of  the  Council,  told  me  he  enquired  if  there  was  any  cause  for  removal.  No 
answer  was  given.  He  voted  against  our  removal.  I  believe  there  were  many 
cases  of  the  kind  in  the  state.  Let  Mr.  Hammond,  if  he  again  gets  access  to  the 
books  of  the  Council,  look  at  the  names  of  those  in  the  new  commission,  compare 
them  with  those  before  that  time  in  office,  and  he  will  be  able  to  discover  some- 
thing of  the  causes  as  well  as  the  manner  of  mak.ag  removals.  If  the  new  is 
much  lees  than  three  years  younger  than  the  old  commission,  he  may  rest  assured 
that  some  covert  object  was  in  view.  Removal  from  office  on  account  of  politics 
was  began  under  Ja3''9  administration,  and  carried  to  as  high  a  pitch  as  it  ever 


*  Gen.  Root  will  see,  if  he  will  tarn  to  Vol.  I.,  p.  I7i,  that  I  did  "  look  into  tho 
right  bill." 


BXPLANATORY    NOTES.  581 

WBfl  since  tbat  time.  The  fashion  has  been  followed,  and  frequently  to  a  ridica 
lous  extent,  but  hardly  ever,  if  ever,  exceeded.  Gov.  Jay,  I  have  been  informed, 
told  Messrs.  Clinton,  Spencer,  and  Roseboom,  while  in  the  Council  in  1801,  that 
he  was  himself  opposed  to  such  measures,  but  that  his  friends  urged  him  on,  and 
he  was  forced  to  comply.  I  have  no  doubt,  nor  had  I  in  the  time  of  it,  that  both 
Gov.  Jay  and  President  Adams  were,  "during  the  reign  of  terror,"  urged  by 
the  madness  of  the  times,  and  the  pressure  of  friends,  to  do  many  things  their 
own  pt-udent  counsels  forbid. 

The  ardent  feelings  of  the  General,  when  he  was  a  young  man  and  a  busy 
actor  in  the  scenes  he  describes,  must  have  returned  and  had  some  iniluence  upon 
him  when  he  wrote  this  note. 

With  respect  to  those  general  commissions  of  the  peace  mentioned  by  General 
Root  and  spoken  of  by  me  in  the  page  above  referred  to,  they  did  indeed  operate 
as  a  removal  of  all  incumbents  of  office  not  included  in  the  new  commission, 
but  these  commissions  ■were,  I  suppose,  made  out  according  to  the  recom- 
mendations of  the  members  from  the  respective  counties,  subject  to  the  revision 
and  correction  of  the  members  of  the  Council  in  whose  district  the  county  into 
which  the  new  commission  was  to  issue  happened  to  be  situated.  I  do  not 
believe  the  Governor  had  much,  and  very  rarely  any  thing,  to  do  with  the 
selection  of  these  comparatively  petty  officers.  That  Judge  Jay  -was  strictly 
correct  as  respects  the  general  principles  which  governed  his  father's  conduct 
with  respect  to  removals  from  office,  I  have  no  manner  of  doubt. 

On  page  127, 1  mention  the  removal  of  John  Jacob  Lansing  from  the  office  of 
Sheriff  of  New  York,  without  any  charge  of  mal-c&nduct  against  him.  It  is 
true  no  charge  appeared  on  the  books  of  the  Council,  but  I  was  nevertheless  in- 
correct as  appears  from  the  following  letter  which  I  received  from  Judge  Jay. 

J.  D.  H 

New  York,  Jan.  I5tfi,  1846. 
Mt  Dear  Sir: — 

A  few  days  since  I  was  at  the  house  of  an  elderly  gentleman  of  the  bar  of  this 
city,  and  be,  of  his  own  accord,  and  without  my  having  made  the  slightest  allusion 
to  your  work,  brought  out  the  1st  Vol.  of  your  historj',  and  remarked,  that  he 
had  detected  an  inaccuracy  in  it  respecting  my  father.  He  then  turned  to  the 
passage  in  which,  in  reply  to  my  assertion  that  the  Gov.  had  never  removed  a 
man  from  office  on  account  of  his  politics,  you  cite  the  cases  of  Lansing  and 
Peck,  for  whose  removal  no  causes  are  assigned  on  the  minutes  of  the  Council, 
and  you  seem  to  take  it  for  granted  that  they  were  removed  on  account  of  their 
politics.  The  gentleman  informed  me  that  he  was  familiar  with  the  case  of  the 
sheriff— That  Lansing  was  a  federalist,  and  of  course  a  political  friend  of  the 
Gov.,  but  although  a  good  sort  of  man,  he  was  indolent  and  inefficient — That  the 
lawyers  made  great  complaints  that  they  could  not  get  their  writs  returned,  and 
that  the  Governor  removed  him  in  consequence  of  these  complaints. 

WILLIAM  JAY. 

Jabez  D.  Hammond,  Esq. 


582  EXPLANATORY    NOTES. 


(Note  P.,  Referred  to  on  Page  128.) 


The  bill  for  the  gradual  abolition  of  slavery,  which  passed  the  assembly  during 
the  session  of  1799,  was  not  lost  in  the  senate.  It  passed  into  a  law,  and  begnn 
to  operate  on  the  5th  July,  1799.  It  was  introduced  in  the  assembly  by  .lohii 
Swartwout,  of.  New  York,  and  provided  that  from  and  aftor  the  4th  day  of  ,Iuly 
next,  every  child  born  of  a  slave,  should  be  taken  and  adjudired  to  be  born  free, 
but  might  be  held  as  an  apprentice  servant,  if  a  male,  till  28,  and  if  a  female,  till 
25  years  of  age.  I  moved  an  amendment  of  the  bill,  to  render  the  male  free  at 
twenty-one,  and  the  female  at  eighteen.  I  urged  the  propriety  of  putting  the 
children  of  slaves  upon  the  same  footing  as  the  children  of  freemen — that  they 
were  so  already,  both  by  the  constitution  and  laws  of  this  slate,  and  by  the 
Divine  Law.  The  declaration  of  Independence  was  made  the  preamble  to  the 
Constitution  of  this  state,  and  of  course  part  and  parcel  thereof,  at  least  the  prin- 
ciples therein  declared  are  recognised  by  the  constitution,  and  thereby  became 
law,  and  of  as  much  binding  force  as  any  part  of  that  instrument.  It  declares  that 
all  men  are  born  equally  free,  and  are  entitled  to  retain  inalienable  privileges, 
among  which  are  life,  libertj',  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  The  Divine  lavv 
w^as  promulgated  at  the  creation  of  the  world.  To  man  was  given  dominion 
over  all  created  things— any  m'Z«.  is  therefore  entitled  to  hold  property.  By 
our  laws  a  slave  can  hold  no  property,  but  is  himself  the  property  of  another. 
The  law  of  God  is  paramount,  and  our  slave  laws  are  void.  The  slaveholders 
at  that  time  were  chiefly  Dutch.  Thej-  raved  and  swore  by  diintler  nn/t  hlixen 
that  we  were  robbinsr  them  of  their  property.  We  told  them  they  had  none,  and 
could  hold  none  in  human  flesh,  while  yet  alive,  and  we  passed  the  lavi". 

I  have  held  the  same  principle  in  regard  to  slavery  from  that  time  to  the 
present  day. 

In  1821,  when  a  member  of  the  assembly,  T  introduced  a  bill*  declarin?  that 
slavery  cannot  exist  by  the  laws  of  this  state,  and  enforced  its  passage  by  the 
same  general  course  of  argument  I  urged  in  my  more  youthful  days.  I  got 
quite  a  respectable  vote  in  its  favor,  and  should  nndoubtedly  have  got  a  much 
larger  one  had  it  not  been  for  the  law  of  1317,  which  made  all  free  after  the  4th 
Julj%  1827.  E.  R. 

The  positions  here  taken  by  so  eminent  a  statesman  and  constitutional  lawyer 
as  Gen.  Root,  are  entitled  to  great  consideration  ;  and  the  more  so.  because,  if  his 
principle  be  sound,  (and  I  for  one  believe  it  to  be  so)  all  the  states  which  were 
represented  in  the  Congress  of  1776,  became  parties  to  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  and  thereby  admitted  the  principles  promulgated  in  this  iristrn- 
ment  to  be  the  fundamental  law  of  the  old  thirteen  United  States.  The  result  i«, 
that  the  adoption  of  the  declaration  of  Independence  by  the  respective  states, 
virtually  abolished   slavery  in  all  those  states.  J.  D.  H. 

*  See  Vol.  I.,  page  540—541. 


EXPLANATORY    NOTES.  583 


(Note  Q.,  Referred  to  on  Page  229.) 


The  author  has  given  quite  a  correct  account  of  the  union  of  the  Burrites  and 
Bepuhlicans  against  Gov.  Levv'is  in  1805-6 — and  which  was  said  to  have  been 
consummated  at  the  celebrated  Dyde  supper.  I  know  something  of  it  myself. 
Although  I  was  not  much  of  a  Burrite,  being  in  Congress  and  absent  from  home 
till  within  a  tew  days  of  the  election,  and  then  cautiously  refraining  from  all 
positive  action  in  regard  to  it,  yet  I  was  set  down  as  such,  and  am  so  registered 
by  the  author.  Happening  in  Albany  shortly  after  the  Dyde  supper,  I  wag 
invited  to  make  one  of  a  large  dinner  party.  The  guests  were  chiefly  distin- 
guished men,  who  in  the  election  of  1804,  had  given  the  preference  to  Col.  Burr. 
A  few  distinguished  men  were  present  who  had  preferred  Gov.  Lewis.  We 
were  highly  complimented  for  our  early  and  superior  sagacity  in  discovering  the 
unfitness  of  Gov.  Lewis  for  this  important  office.  As  I  had  taken  no  active  part 
in  the  elcct-nn,  I  seemed  to  be  the  peculiar  object  of  even  lavish  encomium. 
They  allowed  that  I  had  been  actuated  by  a  noble  and  disinterested  patriotism — 
not  from  any  attachment  to  Col.  Burr,  but  from  a  persuasion  that  the  public 
interest  would  not  be  promoted  by  the  election  of  Lewis.  They  endeavored  to 
persuade  us  to  believe  that  we  had  pursued  the  republican  path,  while  they  had 
inadvertently  been  led  astray  in  the  pursuit  of  a  phantom.  E.  B,, 


(Note  R.,  Referred  to  on  Page  248.) 


I  was  acquainted  with  Burr,  and  I  thought  w^ell  acquainted  with  him,  -when 
in  the  height  of  his  power  and  fame.  I  was  two  years  with  him  in  the  assembly ; 
was  in  Congress  when  he  was  President  of  the  senate,  and  have  heard  him  in  the 
Supreme  Court  and  Court  of  Errors.  From  this  knowledge  of  him  I  draw  quite 
diflercnt  conclusions,  in  regard  to  his  talents,  from  those  of  the  author.  As  a 
lawyer  and  as  a  scholar  he  was  not  inferior  to  Hamilton.  His  reasoning  powers 
were  at  least  equal.  Their  morfe.s  of  argument  wore  very  different.  Hamilton 
was  very  diffuse  and  wordy.  His  words  were  so  well  chosen,  and  his  sentences 
BO  finelj'  fonned  into  a  swelling  current,  that  the  hearer  would  be  captivated. 
The  listener  would  admire  if  he  was  not  convinced.  Burr's  arguinents  were 
generally  methodized  and  compact.  I  used  to  .say  of  them,  when  they  were 
rivals  at  the  bar,  that  Burr  would  say  as  much  in  half  an  hour  as  Hamilton  in 
two  hours.  Bnrr  was  terse  and  convincing,  while  Hamilton  was  flowing  and 
rapturous.  They  were  much  the  greatest  men  in  this  state,  and  perhaps  the 
greatest  men  in  the  United  States.  Burr  was  not  distinguished  for  his  morality, 
nor  was  Hamilton  ever  dabbed  professor  of  the  moral  law.  E.  B,. 


584  EXPLANATOKY    NOTES. 


(Note  S.,  Referred  to  on  Page  329.) 


I 


The  information  given  the  author  by  William  A.  Clarke,  member  of  assembly 
from  Orange  county,  in  relation  to  the  proposed  distribution  of  stock  in  the  State 
Bank  as  an  inducement  to  its  passage,  is  correct.  I  was  in  Albany  while  the 
bill  for  the  incorporation  of  that  Bank  was  pending  in  the  legislature.  I  was 
not  a  member — I  had  been  the  year  before,  but  was  then  a  member  elect  of 
Congress,  to  take  my  seat  at  the  next  session.  I  had  for  years  before  been 
politically  associated  with  those  engaged  in  procuring  the  passage  of  the  bill, 
and  with  most  of  those  intended  for  directors  of  the  bank.  I  could  not  of 
course  be  ignorant  of  the  object,  nor  of  the  proposed  means  for  its  accomplish- 
ment. In  the  first  place  it  must  be  Republican,  to  counteract  the  political  in- 
fluence of  the  Albany  Bank,  and  thus  to  make  it  grateful  to  the  parly  and  insure 
its  passage,  the  stock  must  be  well  distributed  throughout  the  state,  and  the 
■way  to  do  it  most  readily  would  be  for  the  republican  members  of  the  Legislature 
to  take  shares.  I  was  asked  to  take  a  part  in  the  bank,  and  I  did  subscribe  for 
fifty  shares.  I  returned  home,  and  when  I  learned  that  the  bill  had  passed  both 
Houses,  and  had  become  a  law,  I  went  to  Albany  to  pay  in  the  first  instalment, 
and  take  the  scrip  for  my  shares.  I  called  upon  most  of  the  directors,  but  the 
paper  to  which  I  had  subsaibed  for  my  shares,  vas  not  to  be  found,  and  of 
course  no  shares  were  reserved  for  me.  The  Directors  afterwards  allowed  me 
sight  shares,  and,  as  one  of  them  told  me,  from  those  reserved  for  themselves. 
I  declined  to  take  them,  as  I  had  prepared  to  take  the  whole  number  subscribed 
for,  and  did  not  wish  to  be  troubled,  at  so  great  a  distance  from  the  Bank,  with 
so  small  a  share  of  its  stock.  After  the  adjournment  of  the  legislature,  John 
Lamb,  one  of  the  members  from  Delaware,  presented  me  with  a  certificate  of 
eight  shares  for  myself,  and  offered  me  eight  other  shares  allowed  him.  He  saio 
he  should  not  fill  them  up  himself,  and  it  was  thought  I  should  be  satisfied  with 
the  sixteen  shares.     In  a  fit  of  more  spunk  than  wisdom,  I  rejected  the  whole. 

There  was  nothing  of  mystery  in  the  passage  of  the  bank.  It  was  passed  as 
fk  party  measure,  with  the  avowed  intention  of  distributing  the  stock  among  the 
party.  There  was  no  assurance  that  tlie  stock  would  be  above  par.  There  was 
no  body  to  assure,  nor  was  there  any  need  of  it  to  secure  the  passage  of  the  bill. 
It  was  urged,  by  the  projectors  and  managers  of  the  scheme,  that  the  stock  would 
be  above  par,  to  induce  prominent  republicans  as  well  as  members  of  the  legis- 
lature to  go  into  the  measure.  The  affidavits  of  Luther  Rich  and  others  were 
never  taken  as  applicable  to  this  bank  ;*— nor  was  the  "  Jedediah  Bushel"  anec- 
dote. Members  of  the  legislature  did  not  sign  to  any  paper,  and  there  was  no 
disguise  in  the  transaction.  These  affidavits  must  have  been  made  with  reference 
to  subsequent  transactions,  and  the  affair  of  Judge  Peck  was  in  the  case  of  the 
charter  of  the  Mechanics  and  Farmers  Bank.  E.  R. 


*  I  have  myself  seen  a  printed  paper  purporting  to  be  a  copy  of  the  aflSdavit 
of  Luther  Rich,  as  set  forth  in  the  text.  Gen.  Root  does  not  of  course  claim  to 
make  this  negative  allegation  from  his  own  knowledge.  His  suggestion  in 
relation  to  Judge  Peck  may  be,  and  propably  is,  correct.  J.  D.  H. 


EXPLANATORY    NOTES.  585 


(Note  T.,  Referred  to  on  Page  330.) 


WTien  the  State  Bank  was  created,  the  procurement  of  bank  charters  was  not 
a  matter  of  speculation.  It  was  not  then,  as  a  few  years  afterwards,  reduced  to 
a  corrupt  science.  The  projectors  of  this  bank  found  that  their  friends  in  New 
York  had  attained  mucli  of  political  influence  by  means  of  the  Manhattan  Bank, 
and  w^ere  desirous  of  doing  the  same  in  Albany,  by  the  establishment  of  a  new 
one  in  that  city.  They  were  apprehensive  that  without  some  correlative  source 
of  gain,  the  stock  of  a  new  Bank  in  Albany  would  not  be  profitable  ;  and  indeed 
that  it  might  be  difficult  to  induce  them  to  become  so.  Accordingly  they  took 
the  Onondaga  Salt  Springs  to  aid  along  their  project.  That  being  denied,  they 
sought  to  push  it  forward  by  spreading  the  stock  among  the  influential  repub- 
licans of  the  state,  including  members  of  the  Legislature,  and  carry  it  through  as 
a  party  measure.  Nothing  in  the  transaction  had  the  least  semblance  of  a 
corrupt  influence.  No  one  would  hesitate,  from  motives  of  delicacy,  to  offer  to 
a  member,  nor  for  him  to  take,  shares  in  a  bank  sooner  than  in  a  turnpike  road  or 
the  old  canals.  But  afterwards,  when  leading  members  of  the  party  put  them- 
selves in  opposition  to  a  projected  Bank  charter,  either  because  it  might  aid  the 
political  power  of  their  adversary,  or  impair  the  gains  of  their  own  cherished 
institution,  the  petitioners,  to  secure  success,  resorted  to  means  corrupting  in 
tlieir  character,  and  demoralizing  in  their  tendencies.  Their  shares  would  be 
assigned  to  members,  and  upon  a  credit,  and  with  assurance  of  a  certain  premium 
in  the  event  of  a  charter.  In  the  case  of  the  Mechanic's  and  Farmer's  Bank,  the 
members  had  their  shares,  and  speculators  were  present  and  purchased  them  in. 
In  this  bank  it  was  said  that  the  informal  scrip,  or  brief  minute,  was  made  out  to 
"J.  Bushel"  and  by  Judge  Peck  assigned  in  the  Tisual  informal  manner.  But 
transactions  of  this  kind  had  not  yet  become  wicked  in  the  public  estimation. 
They  were  talked  of  as  pleasantries.  The  Merchant's  Bank  in  1805  had  powerful 
opposition  to  encounter,  and  of  course  made  use  of  powerful  means  to  accom- 
plish the  object.  Then  the  shares  and  assurance  became  downright  corruption. 
This  was  the  commencement  of  that  "  corrupt  practice"  mentioned  in  page  329 
by  our  author.  E.  H. 

The  General  says,  that  "  nothing  in  the  transaction  had  the  least  semblance  of 
coiTupt  influence."  I  have  no  doubt  of  his  sincerity,  and  I  readily  concede  that 
he  did  not  discover  any  corrupt  influence.  It  will  be  remembered  that  he  was 
not  at  the  time  a  member.  But  grant  that  Wm.  A.  Clark's  account  of  the  trans- 
action is  correct,  and  concede  that  representations  were  made  that  the  stock 
would  be  above  par  (and  I  am  quite  sure  "Wm.  A.  Clark  did  so  state,  and  if  he 
did  not,  he  is,  I  believe,  now  living  in  Orange  county,  and  can  correct  me  if  I 
err)  did  not  the  assurance  that  everj-  republican  member  should  have  a  certain 
number  of  shares,  if  the  charier  for  the  bank  passed,  have  a  tendency  to  induce 
the  republican  members  to  act  and  vote  from  mercenary  motives  ?  The  General 
nimself  was  angry  because  he  did  not  get  his  full  tale  of  Btock— Why  was  he 
angry,  if  shares  were  not  desirable  ?  J.  D.  jj. 


586  EXPLANATORY    KOTES. 


(Note  U.,  Referred  to  on  Page  338.) 


The  author  thinks  the  application  for  the  charter  of  the  bank  of  America  a 
meritorious  one,  and  standing  on  its  own  merits  ought  to  have  been  granted 
Had  he  been  well  acquainted  with  the  application  of  Col.  Throop  for  a  five  million 
bank,  he  would  have  arrived  at  a  diiferent  conclusion.  I  \vill  proceed  to  give 
the  outlines  of  that  application,  bat  1  must  do  it  entirely  from  memory,  and 
without  any  journal  or  document  to  refre.sh  it. 

The  old  Bank  of  the  United  States  had  expired  by  the  limitation  of  its  charter, 
and  the  bill  for  its  revival  had  been  rejected  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States 
by  the  casting  vote  of  the  Vice  President.  A  large  share  of  its  stock  was  held 
by  foreigners,  mostly  Hollanders.  Col.  Throop  was  their  agent,  at  least  to 
the  amount  of  five  millions  of  that  stock.  Early  in  the  session  of  1812,  he  made 
an  application  to  the  legislature  of  this  state,  in  behalf  of  these  foreign  stock- 
holders, for  the  incorporation  of  a  bank  of  five  millions  of  ihi.s  stock,  and  as  a 
bonus  for  the  charter  he  proposed  to  pay  into  the  treasuiy  of  this  state  ten  per 
cent  on  the  capital,  before  the  company  should  be  allowed  to  operate  under  the 
charter.  Thebillwas ready  drawn,  and  presented  with  the  petition  to  the  senate, 
read  the  first  and  second  lime,  committed  to  a  committee  of  the  whole  liouse, 
and  put  upon  the  general  orders.  I  ofton  called  for  the  consideration  of  the  bill, 
hut  it  would  never  "co7«e  at  nit/  call."  The  applicants  for  the  five  million 
bank,  or  Bank  of  America,  pretended  to  have  of  the  stock  of  the  old  United  States 
Bank,  but  it  was  known  they  had  but  little  if  any  of  it  at  command.  They  too 
were  to  give  a  bonnx  often  per  cent ;  but  subsequent  events  showed,  what  waa 
then  believed,  that  they  never  intended  to  pay  it.  This  application,  when  com- 
pared with  Col.  Throop's,  could  have  no  merits  of  its  own.  I  was  extremely 
anxious  to  pass  the  five  million  bank.  I  urged  the  advantage  ofsavingthis  large 
foreign  capital  in  this  country,  as  well  as  the  rich  accession  of  half  a  million 
of  dollars  to  our  treasury.  It  was  this  proposition  which  suggested  to  my  mind 
the  plan  which  I  submitted  for  tlie  adoption  of  the  Legislature,  to  institute  a 
board  with  full  power  to  grant  bank  charters.  My  plan  was  to  authorize  the 
Secretary  of  State,  Comptroller  and  Attorney  General,  to  grant  charters  or 
licence  to  any  company  to  caiTv  on  banking  operations,  under  proper  restrictions 
and  for  a  limited  period,  on  paying  in  all  their  capital,  and  ten  or  more  per  cent 
upon  it  as  a  bonus  into  the  treasury.  This,  I  urged,  would  limit  banking  capital 
to  the  wants  of  the  country,  keep  the  stock  above  par,  and  ensure  fidelity  in  the 
companies.  The  revenues  to  be  derived  from  this  source,  I  was  for  applying  to 
the  school  fund.  Had  my  plan  been  adopted,  what  a  rich  blessing  it  would 
have  been  to  the  countrj'  ?  li..  K. 

The  facts  contained  in  this  note  are  of  great  importance,  and  ought  to  have 
been  inserted  in  ray  histoiy.  If  any  additional  evidence  were  required  to  prove 
that  the  Legislature  acted  corruptly  in  chartering  the  Bank  of  America,  the  fact 


EXPLANATORY    NOTES.  587 

that  they  rejected  Col.  Throop's  application,  urged  as  it  was  by  the  talents  and 
eloquence  of  Gen.  Root,  and  granted  the  petition  for  a  charter  to  the  Bank  of 
America,  is  of  itself  decisive.  J.  D.  H. 


(Note  V.,  Referred  to  on  Page  41. ) 


I  am  reminded  by  Gen  Root  of  an  error  which  I  regret  has  been  often  repeated. 
From  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  federal  constitution,  in  1788,  till  about  the 
time  o£the  election  of  Gen.  Jackson  in  1828,  the  party  opposed  to  the  federahsts, 
was  known  as  the  Republican  party.  For  a  long  time  the  word  democrat,  or 
democratic,  was  used  as  a  term  of  reproach.  The  republicans  were  by  the 
federalists  called  democrats,  as  synonymous  with  the  word  Jacobin.  And  indeed 
it  was  intended  to  convey  the  idea  that  the  republican  party  in  principle  and 
practice  was  nearly  allied  to  the  Jacobinic  Clubs  in  France.  On  the  other 
tiand,  the  republicans,  with  a  view  to  cast  odium  on  tlieir  opponents,  called  the 
federalists  aristocrats. 

In  writing  my  history,  1  carelessly  used  the  words  democrat  and  derrwcracy 
according  to  their  proper  meaning,  since  the  presidency  of  General  Jackson. 
As  the  alteration  of  the  stereotype  plate,  in  every  case  where  the  error  occurs, 
would  occasion  considerable  expense,  ihe  reader  himself  is  requested  to  make 
the  correction.  J.  D    H. 


INDEX  TO  VOLUME  I 


ACT,  to  raise  the  pay  of  militia,  for  privateering,  380.  For  raising  two  regiments 
of  colored  men,  3S1.  Relating  to  inland  navigation,  301.  In  relation  to 
internal  improvements,  425. 

ADAMS,  JOHN,  candidate  for  President,  1796,  101.  Is  elected,  result  of  canvass 
102.    Violent  oppositon  to  his  administration,  its  cause,  116. 

ADAMS,  JOHN  Q.,  letter  in  favor  of  the  embargo,  266. 

ADDRESS,  of  Clintonian  party,  504. 

ALLEN,  PETER,  controversy,  413-17. 

ALLIANCE  between  France  and  America,  celebrated  in  New- York,  106. 

ANTI-FEDERALISTS,  their  reasons  for  voting  for  adoption  of  Federal  Constitu- 
tion, 26,  26. 

ANSWER  to  the  Governor's  speech,  282.    Of  the  Senate,  369. 

ARISTIDES,  remarks    upon,  188. 

ARMSTRONG,  JOHN,  elected  Senator  of  United  States,  153.  Appointed  Minis- 
ter to  France,  215.     Secretary  of  War,  358.     Retires,  379. 

AUSTIN,  MOSES,  account  of  his  nomination  for  senator,  470-1 

B. 

BANK,  U.  S.,  charter  expires,  attempt  to  renew  it,  290.  Plan  to  establish  a  great 
bank  in  the  city  of  New-York,  299.  Merchants'  Bank,  New- York,  332- 
35.  Mercantile  Company,  Albany,  219.  Bank  of  America,  project  to 
defeat  the  passage  of  the  bill,  312.    Bill  passed,  314. 

BANKS,  chapter  xvii.  323.  Chartering  Manhattan  Bank,  325-7.  State  Bank,  3ais. 
Merchants'  Bank,  330.  Proceedings  in  chartering  Bank  of  America,  336. 
Chemical  Bank,  337. 

BENSON,  EGBERT,  appointed  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court,  81. 

BOUCK,  WILLIAM  C,  member  of  Assembly,  368.  Appointed  Canal  Commis- 
sioner, 663.    His  character,  564. 

BRIBERY,  bill  for  the  prevention  of,  233. 

BUCKTAIL  PARTY,  origin  of  name,  451.     Obtain  a  majority  in  Assembly,  532. 

BUEL,  JESSE,  Editor  of  the  Plebeian,  224.  Establishes  the  Albany  Argus,  his 
character,  358.  Appointed  State  Printer,  383.  Transfers  the  Argus  to 
Moses  I.  Cantine  and  I.  Q.  Leake,  who  were  appointed  Slate  Printers, 
636. 

BURR,  AARON,  acts  with  the  Federalists  in  ns9,  .39.  Chosen  United  States 
Senator,  60.  Elected  member  of  Assembly  from  Orange  county,  136. 
His  conduct  in  respect  to  the  Presidential  election  in  1800,  137-44.  He 
loses  the  confidence  of  the  republicans,  303.    Becomes  a  candidate  for 


590  INDEX. 

Governor  in  opposition  to  the  Democratic  party,  203.  His  party  de- 
scribed, 203.  Is  defeated,  reflections  on  his  defeat,  208-9.  Charged 
with  treason,  243     His  character,  254-9. 

c. 

CADY,  DANIEL,  member  of  Assembly,  character,  272. 

CANAL,  bill  passed  to  construct,  441.     Proceeding  in  relation  to,  492. 

CANAL  COMMISSIONERS,  names  of  persons  first  appointed,  301.  Their  powers 
and  political  character,  301.     Appointed  under  Ihe  aet  of  1S16,  425-6. 

CAUCUS,  how  far  its  proceedings  ought  to  be  binding,  192.  Of  Federalists,  re- 
specting the  support  of  Col.  Burr  for  Governor,  208.  Proceedings  of, 
411-12.    To  nominate  United  States  Senator,  4S4. 

CHANGE,  of  the  mode  of  nominating  candidates  for  the  Senate,  294. 

CLARK,  ISRAEL  W.,  editor  of  Albany  Register,  character,  472. 

CLINTON,  GEORGE,  opposes  adoption  of  U.  S.  Constitution,  4.  His  re-election, 
41.  Re-election,  62.  Investigation  by  tne  Assembly  as  to  the  validl'.y  of 
his  election,  76.  His  views  in  relation  to  appointments  and  removals, 
83.  Declines  a  re-election,  SS.  Elected  member  of  Assembly,  135.  No- 
minated Governor,  154.  Elected,  102.  Elected  Vice-President,  216. 
Reasons  assigned  for  his  vole  against  U.  S.  Bank,  290.  Letter  to  Wil- 
liam Dunning,  209.  A  portion  of  the  democratic  party  for  giving  him 
the  vote  of  the  state  lor  President,  2GS.     Death,  312. 

CLINTON,  DE  WITT,  elected  member  of  Assembly,  108.  Chosen  Senator  from 
Southern  District,  115.  Member  of  Council  of  Appointment,  153.  Of- 
fers resolution  in  the  Senate  that  Pre;idential  Electors  shall  be  chosen 
in  districts  by  the  people,  183.  Chosen  United  States  Senator,  183.  Ap- 
pointed Mayor  of  New-York,  resigns  his  seat  in  U.  S.  Senate,  197.  Re- 
marks on  same,  197-200.  Mayor  of  New-York,  262.  Resolutions  and 
speech  approving  the  general  administration,  271.  Mayor  of  New- York, 
289.  Nominated  (or  Lieut.  Governor,  291.  Project  to  support  him  for 
President,  297.  Nominated  candidate  for  President,  315.  Defeated, 
322.  Displaced  from  Mayorality,  399.  His  memorial  to  Legislature 
in  favor  of  Canal,  424.  Appointed  Canal  Commissioner,  425.  Schemes 
to  defeat  his  nomination  for  Governor,  434.  Elected  Governor,  443. 
Speech  to  Legislature,  449.  His  political  position,  474.  Speech  in  1819, 
482.  Re-elected,  531.  Speech  in  1820,  538.  Controversy  with  Senate, 
652-7. 

COLDEN,  C.  D.,  appointed  Mayor  of  New-York,  464. 

COMMON  SCHOOLS,  provisions  for,  proposed  by  Jedediah  Peck,  129.  Fill  for, 
168.  Bill  passed  for  support  of  same,  216.  Governor  urges  attention 
to  the  fund,  280.  Laws  respecting  remodelled,  374.  System  improved, 
491. 

CONVENTION,  at  Poughkeppsie,  21.     Its  proceedings,  22-9. 

CONVENTION,  question  on  calling,  543.  Meeting  at  Tammany  Hall  recommend 
a  bill  for  calling  same,  537. 

CONVENTION  OF  1801,  recommended,  159.    Its  proceedings.  165-7. 

GOODIES,  their  origin,  397. 

COOPER,  CHARLES  D.,  Secretary  of  State,  440. 

COOPER,  WILLIAM,  attempt  in  the  Assembly  to  impeach  him,  77.  Resolution 
rejected,  82. 

COUNCIL  OF  APPOINTMENT,  its  powers,  32.  Governor  claims  exclusive  right 
of  nomination,  32.  Members  of,  in  1789,  38.  In  1790,  44.  In  1791,  49 
in  1792,  64.    Dispute  with  Gov.  Jay,  165-S.    Peculiarity  of  this  feature 


INDEX.  591 

m  the  constitution,  169-70  Its  proceedings  in  1301,  172.  Reniarks  up- 
on, 180  Proceedings  in  1806,  234.  Lewisite  Council  chosen,  237.  Its 
proceedings,  238.  Cliaraeter  of  its  members,  245.  Of  1808,  261.  Its 
proceedings,  261.  Of  1810  and  its  proceedings,  280.  Of  1811,  289.  Of 
1812,  Clintonian  in  its  character,  304.  Of  1813,  Federal,  343.  Its  pro- 
ceedings, 346,  Of  1815,  its  proceedings,  392-6.  Of  lsl6,  417.  Effect 
of  influence  in,  420.  Of  1817,  436.  Proceedings  of,  after  election  of  Ue 
Witt  Clinton,  446.  Manner  of  its  selection  in  lbl8,  458-9.  Of  1820,  618. 
Of  1821,  639.     Its  proceedings,  567-70. 

CRAWFORD,  WM.  H.  candidate  for  President,  410 

CRUGER,  DANIEL,  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  413. 

D. 

DEMOCRATIC  PARTY,  their  success  in  ISOO,  134.     Great  success  in  1803,  194. 
DUDLEY,  CHARLES  E.,  elected  Senator  from  Middle  District,  603. 
DUELS,  singular  combination  of  Burr's  friends,  187.    Duel  between  De  Witt  Clin- 
ton and  John  Swanwout,  186.     Between  Hamilton  and  Burr,  210-14. 
DUER,  WILLIAM  A.,  member  of  Assembly,  character,  427. 
DYDE  SUPPER,  228. 

E. 

EDWARDS,  OGDEN,  introduces  bill  for  convention,  469. 
ELECTORAL  LAW  proposed  by  J.  Swartwout  in  1799,  122. 
ELECTOl^vS  FOR  PRESIDENT  in  18l0,  152. 

EMBARGO,  260.    Effect  of,  265.  

EMMETT,  THOMAS  ADDIS,  appomted  Attorney-General— character,  346. 
EMOTT,  JAMES,  chosen  Speaker,  363. 


FEDERALISTS,  points  of  difference  between  them  and  Anti-Federal  party,  16-19. 
Causes  of  defeat  in  1300,  162.  Obtain  a  majority  in  Assembly,  296. 
Causes  of  again  becoming  a  minority,  286.  Success  in  New-York,  296. 
Charged  with  partiality  to  the  British,  223.  Obtain  majority  in  As- 
sembly, 311.  Of  New-York,  disapprove  of  Hartford  Convention,  369. 
Favor  the  nomination  of  Clinton,  436.  Generally  supported  Clinton, 
474-5.     Two  parties  among,  484. 

FELLOWS,  HENRY,  and  Peter  Al'.in,  controversy  for  seat  in   Assembly,  413-17. 

FRENCH  REVOLUTION,  feelings  of  Americans  in  relation  to,  72. 

G. 

GERMAN,  OBADIAH,  elected  to  the  Assembly,  115.  Character,  218.  Elected 
United  States  Senator,  276.  Elected  Speaker  of  Assembly,  and  contest 
respecting  same,  477-82. 

GREEN  BAG  MESSAGE,  S57. 

H. 

HALE,  DANIEL,  appointed  Secretary  of  State,  112. 

HAMILTON,  ALEXANDEK,  great  agency  in  relation  to  the  United  States  Consti- 
tution, 4.    His  letter  to  T.  Pickering,  14.    Member  of  National  Conven- 


592  INDEX. 

tion,  11.    His  conduct  in  respect  to  Presidential  Election  in  1800, 144^53 

Pamphlet  against  John  Adams,  147.    Argument  in  Supreme   Court  ia 

the  case  of  Harry  Croswell,  266. 
HART,  EPHRAIM,  appointed  Canal  Commissioner,  495. 
HARTFORD  CONVENTION,  3S3. 

HAWLEY,  GIDEO.N,  Superintendent  of  Common  Schools,  346.    Removed,  569. 
HENRY,  JOHN  V.,  appointed  Comptroller,  134.    Removed,  his  character,  174. 
HIGH  MINDED  FEDERALISTS— their  address,  523.     Names,  529. 
HILDRETH,  M.  B.,  appointed  Attorney-General,  262.     Death,  345. 
HOBERT,  JOHN  SLOSS,  elected  United  States  Senator,   110.    His  letter  to  the 

legislature,  110.    Death,  217. 
HOGEBOOM,  JOHN  C,  his  character,  196 
HOLT,  CHARLES,  establishes  the  Columbian,  279. 
HUNTI.VGTON,  HENRY,  member  of  the  Council  of  Appointment,  character,  234. 


JAY,  JOHN,  candidate  for  Governor,  in  1792,  55.  His  election  defeated  by  de- 
struction of  Otsego  votes,  63.  His  prudent  conduct  on  that  occasion,  70. 
Candidate  for  Governor  in  1795,  90.  Elected,  90.  Reception  on  return 
from  England,  91.  His  first  speech,  95.  Re-elected  in  1798,  113.  Refu- 
ses to  call  an  extra  session  of  the  legislature,  144-6  Declines  a  re- 
election, 155. 

JAY,  PETER  A.,  member  of  Assembly,  427.     Recorder  of  New-Y'ork,  606. 

JEFFERSON,  THOMAS,  elected  President,  160.  His  election  celebrated  at  Al- 
bany, 160. 

JEIVKINS,  ELISHA,  appointed  Secretary  of  State,  174,  262,  2S9. 

JONES,  SAMUEL,  appointed  Comptroller,  104.  Importance  of  that  office,  104. 
Resigns,  133. 

JONES,  SAMUEL,  Jr.,  elected  member  of  Assembly,  296. 

K. 

KENT,  JAMES,  member  of  Assembly,  53.  Appointed  Justice  of  Supreme  Court, 
112.  Chief  Justice,  214.  Chancellor,  366.  Hisopposition  tothe  billfor 
encouraging  privateering,  380. 

KING,  RUFUS,  chosen  United  States  Senator,  44.  Appointed  Minister  to  Lon- 
don, 103.  Elected  United  States  Senator,  343-5.  Supports  the  war,  878. 
Nominated  for  Governor,  425.     Re-elected  United  States  Senator,  617. 

KING,  CHARLES,  member  of  Assembly,  his  motion  to  approve  of  the  gallantry 
of  the  Officers  and  Seamen  of  the  Navy,  368. 

KNOWER,  BENJAMIN,  State  Treasurer,  his  character,  562. 


LANDS,  sale  of,  57. 

LANSING,  ABRAHAM  G.,  appointed  Treasurer,  193.    Re-appointed,  282. 

LANSING,  GERRIT  Y.,  chosen  Clerk  of  Assembly,  237.    Removed  from  office 

of  Master  in  Chancery,  289. 
LANSING,  JOHN,  Delegate  to  National  Convention,  11.    Appointed  Justice  of 

the  Supreme  Court,  47.    Nominated  for  Governor  and   declines,  204, 

His  controversy  with  De  Witt  Clinton,  241. 
LAWRENCE,  JOHN,  elected  United  States  Senator,  103. 
LEWIS,  MORGAN,  appointed  Attorney-General,  51.    fustice  of  Supreme  Conrti 


iKDfcXi  59S 

78.    Chief  Justice,  180.    Nominated  for  Governor,  204.    Elected,  208. 

Speecti,  232.    Elected  State  Senator,  285.    Supports  Gov-  Tompkins,  286. 
LIBEL,  law  of  amended,  207. 
LIVINGSTON,  BROCKHOLST,  Justice  of  Supreme  Court,  180.    Associate  Judge 

of  Supreme  Court  of  United  States,  240 
LIVINGSTON,  GILBERT,  speech  in  Poughkeepsie  Convention,  26. 
LIVINGSTON,  MATURIN,  Recorder  of  New- York,  215.    Supports  Merchants' 

Bank  application,  219. 
LIVINGSTON,  ROBERT  R.,  his  support  of  the  Federal  Constitution— his  change 

and  opposition  to  the  Federalists,  107:    Candidate  for  Governor,  113. 

His  death  and  character,  351. 
LOTTERIES,  grant  of  to  Colleges,  373.    Dr.  Nott's  efforts  in  favor  of,  373. 

M. 

MADISON,  JAMES,  his  Kentucky  resolutions  discussed  in  New-York  Legislature, 
125.  Nominated  for  President,  264.  Favors  the  Burrites  and  Lewis- 
ites, 266.  Removes  G.  Granger  from  the  office  of  Postmaster  General 
and  appoints  R.  J.  Meigs,  391. 

MANHATTAN  COMPANY  chartered,  129. 

MARCY,  WILLIAM  L.,  Recorder  of  Troy,  467.  Pamphlet  -vvritteu  by  him  in  fa- 
vor of  R.  King,  515. 

MARCUS  and  PHILO  CATO,  letters  of,  227. 

MARTLING'S  LONG  ROOM,  meeting  at,  230. 

MARTLING  MEN,  oppose  Clinton,  270. 

McCORD,  ANDREW,  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  237.  - 

MoINTYRE,  ARCHIBALD,  elected  to  the  Asssembly,  115.  Appointed  Comptroller 
234.    Removed,  566.    Elected  State  Senator,  570. 

MITCHEL,  SAMUEL  L.,  chosen  U.  S.  Senator,  215.  His  Charater,  216.  Speech 
in  the  Assembly,  283 

MONROE,  JAMES,  candidate  for  the  Presidency,  405.    Nominated  President,  412. 

MORNING  CHRONICLE,  185. 

MORRIS,  GOUVERNEUR,  chosen  U.  S.  Senator,  134.    Canal  Commissoner,  301. 

N. 

NORTH,  WILLIAM,  appointed  United  States  Senator  by  Gov.  Jay,  113.  Chosea 
Speaker  of  Assembly,  280. 

o. 

OAKLEY,  THOMAS  J.,  Surrrogate  of  Dutchess  county,  281.    His  character,  SST. 

Appointed  Attorney-General,  607. 
OTSEGO  COUNT  i",  destruction  of  its  votes,  63. 


I^ARTIES,  first  organized  on  the  question  of  adopting  the  Federal  Constitation 

3.    In  the  Convention  at  Philadelphia,  12. 
PECK,  JEDEDIAH,  elected  to  the  Assembly,  115.    His  character,  123. 
PLATT,  CHARLES  Z.,  chosen  Treasurer,  351. 
PLATT,  JONAS,  appointed  Clerk    of   Herkimer    county,  53.     Nominated    for 

Governor,  279.    Character,  279.    Appointed  Judge  of  Supreme  Cooitt 

366-7. 

38 


594  INDEX. 

PORTER,  PETER  B.,  Canal  Commissioner,  301.    Appointed  Secretary  of  State, 

396. 
PRENDERGAST,  JEDIAH,  contest  with  Wilson  about  his  seat  in  Senate,  462-4^ 
PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTION,  result  of,  in  180S,  202.     Also  in  1812,  322. 
PURDY,  EBENEZEK,  charged  with  bribery,  219.    Resigns  his  seat  in  Senate,  219. 

R. 

RADCLTFF,  PETER  W.,  his  conduct  in  the  Council  of  Appointment,  346-9. 

KESOLUTION,  that  officers  of  United  States  could  not  hold  seats  in  the  New- 
'  York  Legislature,  46.  By  Mr.  Spencer,  that  Comptroller  (Jones)  could 
not  hold  his  seat  as  Senator,  1 1 0.  In  Senate,  for  loan  to  the  Nation,  353. 
To  loan  money  to  Niagara  sufferers,  364.  That  Governor  furnish  infor- 
'  mation  relative  to  interference  of  United  States  officers  at  state  elec- 

tions, 552. 

RESTRAINING  LAW,  first  act  relating  thereto,  331. 

RICHMOND  ENQUIRER,  attack  upon  De  Witt  Clinton,  264. 

ROOT,  ERASTUS  elected  to  the  Assembly,  115.  His  active  part  in  debate  in  the 
Senate,  371.  Resolution  to  inquire  into  the  conduct  of  W.  W.  Van 
Ness,  519.  His  bill  declaring  slavery  unconstitutional,  540.  Speech 
thereon,  541.    Speech  at  caucus  for  nominatmg  Clinton  President,  316. 

s. 

SANFORD,  NATHAN,  chosen  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  288.  Senator  of  United 
States,  393. 

SAVAGE,  JOHN,  member  of  Assembly,  368. 

SCHUYLER,  PHILIP,  chosen  United  States  Senator,  44.    Re-elected,  106. 

SEDITION  LAW,  manner  of  executing  it  by  Federalists,  130. 

SENATORS  of  the  United  States,  bill  for  choosing,  rejected  by  Council  of  Bevi- 
sion,  43. 

SEYMOUR,  HENRY,  elected  Canal  Commissioner,  497, 

SHARPE,  PETER,  chosen  Speaker,  537. 

SHELDON,  ALEXANDER,  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  202-3. 

SLAVERY,  bill  for  abolition  of,  passes  the  Assembly,  123.  Question  about  ad- 
mitting Missouri  with  right  to  hold  slaves,  517. 

SOUTHWICK,  SOLOMON,  chosen  Clerk  of  the  Assembly,  190.  His  character, 
190.  Editor  of  Albany  Register,  267.  Shcriffof  Albany,  273.  First  Pre- 
sident of  Farmers  and  Mechanics'  Bank,  291.  Is  an  agent  for  applicants 
for  Bank  of  America,  301.  Trial  for  bribery,  318.  Nominated  for  State 
Senator,  375.  Defeated,  376.  Removed  from  the  office  of  State  Praiter, 
383.     Appointed  Post-Master  of  Albany,  407. 

SPENCER,  AMBROSE,  member  of  Assembly,  79.  Of  the  Council  of  Appoint- 
ment, 153.  His  correspondence  with  Judge  Foote,  176.  Appointed  At- 
torney-General, 181.  Appointed  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court,  201 
Supports  Gen.  Armstrong  for  President,  358.  Letter  to  R.  Riker  by 
Gen.  King,  319.  Opposition  to  Clintonians,  360.  His  influence  declines. 
419-20.  Supports  Clinton  for  Governor,  422.  Reconoiliatiofi  with 
Clinton,  430.  Appointed  Chief  Justice,  500. 
SPENCER,  JOHN  C,  supported  by  Clintonians  for  United  States  Senator,  484. 

Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  514. 
STATE  SENATORS,  classed  politically,  451.    Clintonians,  their  several  cban^ 

ters,  451-3.    Bucktails  the  like,  453-6.    Federal,  456. 
SUPREME  COURT,  members  of,  42.    Project  respecting,  498. 


INDEX.  595 

T. 

TAMMANY  SOCIETY,  its  History,  340. 

TALLMADGE,  MATTHIAS  B.,  appointed  United  States  Judge  of  Northern  Ui«. 

trict,  217. 

TAYLOR,  JOHN,  Speech  in  the  Senate,  294.  Nominated  Lieutenant-Governor, 
354.  Elected,  357.  Acting  Governor,  his  character,  439.  Personal  af- 
fray between  him  and  Judge  Purdy,  335. 

TAYLOR;  JOHN  W.,  member  of  Assembly,  his  character,  305.  Elected  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Representatives,  United  States,  551. 

THOMAS,  DAVID,  elected  member  of  Assembly,  115.  Agent  of  Bank  of  America, 
tour  through  Western  counties,  301.  Appointed  Stale  Treasurer,  263. 
Re-appointed,  and  causes  for  his  re-appointment,  305.  Arrested  and 
tried  for  bribery,  317. 

THOMPSON,  SMITH,  appointed  Justice  of  Supreme  Court,  180  His  character, 
181.  Appointed  Chief  Justice,  366.  Appointed  Mayor  of  New-York,  and 
declines,  238.    Appointed  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  497. 

TIBBITS,  GEORGE,  elected  senator,  376. 

TILLOTSON,  THOMAS,  appointed  Secretary  of  State,  174. 

TOMPKINS,  DANIEL  D.,  member  of  Convention  of  1300,  165.  Chosen  memter  of 
Congress,  209.  Appointed  Justice  of  Supreme  Court,  214.  Nominated 
for  Governor,  causes,  238.  Elected,  246.  Re-elected,  28S.  Speech, 
261.  Message  proroguing  Legislature,  309.  Re-elected,  357.  His  popu- 
larity, 361.  Endorses  Treasury  notes,  378.  Influence  and  popularity, 
391.  Message  recommending  abolition  of  slavery,  432.  Resigns  his  of- 
fice as  Goverr.or,  439.  His  accounts  with  the  state,  501-21.  Nomina- 
ted for  Governor,  527.  Calls  an  extra  session  of  the  Legislature,  379. 
Declines  the  office  of  U.  S.  Secretary  of  State,  390.  Candidate  for  the 
Presidency,  407.    Nominated  Vice-President  of  United  States,  412. 

TOWNSEND,  HENRY  A.,  member  of  the  Council  of  Appointment,  his  political 
character,  366. 

TREATY  WITH  GREAT  BRITAIN,  opposition  to  it,  92. 

V. 

VAN  BUREN,  MARTIN,  first  civil  appointment,  262.  First  appearance  in  the 
Legislature,  321.  His  bill  for  repealing  the  restraining  law,  371.  Ap- 
pointed Attorney-General,  392.  Elected  U.  S.  Senator,  861.  His  sup- 
port of  Clinton  for  President  and  Tompkins  for  Governor  explained, 
429. 

VAN  NESS,  WM.  P.,  appointed  U.  S.  Judge  for  southern  district,  217. 

VAN  NESS,  WILLIAM  W.,  member  of  Assembly,  his  character,  217.  Leader  of 
the  Federal  party  in  the  Assembly,  235.  Appointed  Judge  of  Supreme 
Court,  247.    Proceedings  in  Assembly  against,  618. 

VAN  RENSSELAER,  STEPHEN,  candidate  for  Lieut.  Governor  in  1795,  90.  Elect- 
ed candidate  for  Governor  against  George  Clinton,  155.  His  letter  to 
his  tenants,  161.     Nominated  for  Governor,  356. 

VAN  RENSSELAER,  JACOB  R.,  Member  of  Assembly,  his  character,  272.  Ap- 
pointed Secretary  of  State,  366. 

VAN  VECHTEN,  ABRAHAM,  appointed  Attorney-General,  231.  He-appointed 
349. 


596  INDEX 

w. 

WAR,  with  Great  Britain,  317.  Difficulties  in  carrying  on  same,  363.  British  cap- 
ture Washington,  377.  Collisions  between  Senate  and  Assembly,  351. 
Vigorous  measures  of  the  Legislature,  381.  Peace,  393.  Condition  of 
country  at  close  of  war,  394. 

WASHINGTON,  GEORGE,  declines  a  re-election  to  the  Presidency,  101.  His 
death,  132. 

WHEATON,  HENRY,  editor  of  the  National  Advocate,  343. 

WILKIN,  JAMES  W.,  chosen  Speaker,  268. 

WILLET,  MARINUS,  candidate  for  Lieutenant-Governor,  293. 

WILLIAMS,  ROBERT,  elected  to  the  Senate  as  a  Republican,  280  His  conduct 
in  the  Council  of  Appointment,  281. 

WOODS,  DAVID,  elected  Speaker,  431-47. 

WOODWORTH,  JOHN,  nominated  United  States  Senator  by  the  Assembly,  191. 
Defeated  on  joint  ballot,  192.  Appointed  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
500.    His  suit  with  the  Bank  of  America,  547. 


YATES,  ROBERT,  Delegate  to  National  Convention,  11.  Charge  to  the  Grand 
Jury  of  Albany  county,  30.  Candidate  for  Governor  against  Gov.  Clin- 
ton, 39.  Appointed  Chief  Justice,  47.  Candidate  for  Governor  against 
John  Jay,  90.     Resigns  office  of  Chief  Justice,  112. 

YATES,  JOSEPH  C,  elected  State  Senator,  221.  Appointed  Judge  of  Supreme 
Court,  262. 

YATES,  JOHN  VAN  NESS,  Recorder  of  Albany,  289.  Removed,  430.  Character, 
289.     Appointed  Secretary  of  State,  468. 

^OUNG,  SAMUEL,  elected  member  of  Assembly,  368.  Chosen  Speaker,  372. 
Author  of  Amicus  Juris  Consultus,  380  Supported  for  United  States 
Senator,  486. 


r\ 


J^  Q  ^  THE  LIBRARY 

v.\A       u^    UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
v)4-      vt3  Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


AVAILABLE    FOR 
01K(JULAT10N   Al-'i'i.l^ 


DISPLAY   PERIOD 


2-TrToi2 


1^' MAR  1 3  r/'|2 


,.-..  ^  .i. 


#l*ErD-^POA 


p. 


JLO-lDjEe=^Jti  M 


20w-8,'61(C2084s4)476 


3  1205  OOOQo   7533 


^^ 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    000  857  183    8 


■;  -i 


^  ■''*^^^.^^^*'"^\'Ci^X*^' 


,"^ 


-.  /   -It"   •!  . 


'km^'Ml 


'Wh. 


vfe 


ieiAvH!; 


;^-^ 


y.ifeif-« 


